Did Mesopotamian peoples, such as the Sumerians or Babylonians of the Bronze Age, for example, have contact with Indo-European peoples? I'm not talking about Persian or Roman colonization, I'm talking specifically about the Bronze Age. Was there any influence?
>>18475241>Sumerians or BabyloniansWere indo-european (white).
>>18475244Stop trolling, please.
>>18475241Probably. There's arguably Indo-European influence in the Sumerian language.
>>18475241The Hittites were an indo-european people and the Scythians occasionally rolled in from the north to do the shit they typically did everywhere else (serve as mercenaries, raid, etc)
>>18475241Anatolia and persia were both populated by indo-european peoples or atleast speakers
>>18475254>>18475256Don't forget the medians and other Iranians.
>>18475252What are you talking about?
>>18475261There's a theory among linguists that there's Indo-European traces in the Sumerian language.
>>18475247not trollng. the jews are hiding the truth about our past
>>18475283There's also a theory that there's turkic traces in the sumerian language. Many such cases
>>18475244Ah yes look at these white babylonians
>>18475241Yes. They called them Umman Manda.>Umman Manda (Akkadian: 𒂟𒌋𒌋𒁕, romanized: Ummān Manda lit.'the horde from who knows where') is a term used in the early second and first millennia BC for a poorly known people in the Ancient Near East. They have been identified in different contexts as Hurrians, Elamites, Medes, Cimmerians, and Scythians. The homeland of Umman Manda seems to be somewhere from Central Anatolia to north or northeastern Babylonia (Greater Kurdistan), possibly in what later came to be known as Mitanni, Mannae, or Media. Zaluti, whose name seems to have an Indo-Iranian etymology, is mentioned as a leader of Umman Manda. He is even suggested to be identified with Salitis the founder of the Hyksos, the Fifteenth dynasty of Egypt>Spelling variations of Umman-manda appear frequently in Sumerian-Akkadian bilingual texts, typically rendered as Ummān-manda in Akkadian with the Sumerian logographic form ERIN2.MA.DA (meaning "troops of Manda"), reflecting phonetic and morphological adaptations across genres>The main source for the Babylonian and Median military operations against Assyria is the so-called Chronicle of Nabopolassar (or Gadd Chronicle), which is a part of the Babylonian chronicles and covers the period from 616 to 609 BCE. In this text the Babylonian ally is first referred to as Medes but elsewhere also as Umman-manda. In particular, this Chronicle mentions Cyaxares as the king of the Umman-manda, whereas the same source in the report concerning the capture of Aššur designates him simply as a “Mede” (Grayson, pp. 93-94, ll. 24-65; Pritchard, ed., pp. 202-3). The same chronicle also states that the Umman-manda came to the assistance of Nabopolassar when he was at war with the Assyrians in the Ḥarrān region (Grayson, p. 95, ll. 59–61). To judge from a Babylonian letter, the term Umman-manda is a reference to the Medes
>>18475523>This letter, sent by the crown prince Nebuchadnezzar, says that “the king has gone to Ḥarrān, [and] with him went large forces of Medes” (Contenau, no. 99). Evidently, Umman-manda and Mādāya (Medes) are used in these sources as different names for one and the same people>Herodotus claimed that Greek legends, especially when similarities in names familiar to Greeks and used by foreign peoples were observed, could explain the origin of such an ethnonym. According to his Histories (ca.440 BC):>"The Medes were formerly called by everyone Arians, but when the Colchian woman Medea came from Athens to the Arians, they changed their name, like the Persians [did after Perses, son of Perseus and Andromeda]. This is the Medes' own account of themselves."
>>18475323Its Bull shit
>>18475283I've never read about that.
>>18475324Those are Persians you fucking retard. This is a depiction of the immortals, the elite guard of the Persian kings
>>18475283NTA But he's talking about a substratum called "Euphratic," which is still debated at least a little, but there are some definitely Indo-European words and certain mythological similarities in the Middle East with Indo-European themes that don't seem to me to be merely coincidental.
>>18476140>substratum called "Euphratic"I think a specific topic about this would have been more helpful, especially considering the responses I've received here. People are quite enthusiastic. By the way, I've never read anything about linguistics beyond the basics, but what substratum are we talking about? Feel free to share if you want.
>>18475241Mittani and (possibly) kassites.
>>18476138It's literally an ishtar gate mosaic
>>18476151This
>>18476211>It's literally an ishtar gate mosaicWithin obviously shitty modern paint job... I mean come on, niggers? Please, lol.
>>18476211No, it comes from the Palace of Darius in Susahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immortals_(Achaemenid_Empire)#/media/File:Persian_warriors_from_Berlin_Museum.jpg
>>18475241The Mitanni and Hittites were both Indo-Europeans. Although their influence was rather weak considering they never actually entered the region for long, the Mitanni at times ruled parts of upper Mesopotamia as overlords competing with Babylon, but they never controlled the region directly, and eventually they were dismembered by the Assyrians. Interaction with the Anatolian Indo-Europeans was practically non existent until the iron age outside of letters and trade
Whittaker, G. (2012). Euphratic: A phonological sketch. In B. Nielsen Whitehead, T. Olander, B. A. Olsen, & J. E. Rasmussen (Eds.), The sound of Indo-European: Phonetics, phonemics, and morphophonemics (pp. 577–606). Museum Tusculanum Press.https://www.academia.edu/3592967/Euphratic_A_phonological_sketch
>>18476432Do we know which group? If it's Sumerian, it predates any Hittite or Mittani.
>perkɀ-u- ‘(of oak and thunder)’ > Eu. *Kɀrʘkɀró- Karkara ~ Kakra ~ Kakru ‘Karkara (city name; wr. rainwind + place)Maybe this could explain the various similarities between IE and Mesopotamia mythologies??
>>18476485It's likely to be fairly old considering Whittaker identifies a number of Sumerian words ending in -ah from PIE *-eh2. This is an archaism since word-final laryngeals were lost and remain unattested in every other branch including Anatolian.But since laryngeals are lost so frequently, that doesn't really help us pin them down as pre-Anatolian, early Anatolian, or early Yamnaya. I would just be confident that they're not Corded Ware. A Y-DNA haplogroup is probably what you want for further insight.Another point of data is the word for pig:• Akkadian 𒊺𒄷𒌑 (še-hu-u2, “pig”)• Old Babylonian šahû• Sumerian 𒋚 (šah), 𒂄 (šaḫ)Later PIE shows a metathesis of the laryngeal and *u: *suH-, so I would say there's a good chance whoever these people were, they split off around or before the time of Anatolian separating or in the early Yamnaya phase. It's hard to say precisely without data from other disciplines.
>>18476511Maybe gutians?I don't know the answer because I'm not a linguist like you, but then we're dealing with something as old as Yamnaya at least? Interesting
>>18476674>>18476511Hasanlu R-Z2103 clades are shared with Armenians:https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/R-Y4362/treehttps://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/R-PF7580/tree
>>18476698Did the predecessors of the Armenians travel through the Balkans and then cross Anatolia or did they cross over the Caucasus from the steppe?
>>18476814I favor the last option. Ancient Iranian samples with R1b predate Indo-Iranians and fall under very obvious Anatolian-Caucasus clades. The same is true for R1b in modern-day West Iranians. There are archaeological studies of a possible presence of Afanasievo in Central Asia.
Chariots and horsies being used in Bronze Age Mesopotamia and Egypt implies contact with IE steppeniggers
>>18476814>>18476698>>18476824I'm not denying the possibility of this Aryan substrate, but the haplogroup doesn't explain much. Abashevo culture, the R1b‑Z2103 haplogroup appears in multiple men at the Pepkino mound, forming a genetically coherent cluster with close paternal relationships. This cluster is not confined locally but is connected across regions—linking to individuals from both southern Bavaria and the Sintashta horizon—highlighting a highly mobile, culturally fluid network in Bronze Age Eurasia
>>18476850the clades are downstream to the Armenians/Anatolians ones
previous discussionhttps://desuarchive.org/his/thread/18281985/
>>18475241The Bronze Age was a long ass time. They definitely did during the late Bronze Age as the Mitanni and Hittites were literally Indo-European. The chariot may have even been brought to the Middle East by the Mitanni.
>>18476365Except for a minority superstrate, Mittani were Hurrian speakers
The recent biased and shitty "study" by Amjadi et al. (2025), entitled "Ancient DNA indicates 3,000 years of genetic continuity in the Northern Iranian Plateau," found the R1b-Z2103 allele and some autosomal ancestry similar to that of the Yamnaya culture in Iranian samples. So yes, there was a pre-Andronovic Indo-European presence in Iran, not directly in Mesopotamia, but these groups or related groups could explain it>>18476511
>>18476860This
The Mittani are very interesting, but they are often reduced to "Hurrians," even by modern, retarded nationalists. But there are several words that may be useful to study. 1/3
>>184768722/3
>>184768733/3Michael Witzel talked about Kassite and Mitanni words of Indo-Iranian origin in Various words end in -aš, making their IE origin clear likeŠuriyaš, Buriyaš, Maruttaš, Kara-Indaš, Kara-hardaš, Karzibartaš, Kaštiliaš Karduniaš, Šuzigaš, Duzagaš, Aqriyaš, Urzigurumaš / Uršigurumaš, Tazzigurumaš, timiraš, laggtakkaš, bugaš, dakaš, simmaš, šahumaš, anakandaš \ akkamdaš \ akkandaš, massiš It is not likely that so many words would happen to end in -aš if not a suffix. The lack of many in -uš and -iš seems to show that a-stems existed, as in IIr.
>>18476891>>18476873>>18476872This is very interesting, thank you
