Horrible Histories: Missing Mitannians
by
Damien F. Mackey
“The
Mitannians are perhaps one of the most enigmatic Near Eastern Superpowers.
Despite
their impressive empire, we know remarkably little about them,
especially
compared to the Egyptians or the Hittites”.
Introduction
Professor Gunnar
Heinsohn (University of Bremen) and Emmet Sweeney, historical revisionists,
have, in recent times, arrived at some startling conclusions about ancient
history - some of these warranting further critical examination, whilst other
of their views appear to me to be extreme and well wide of the mark. In order
to account for an apparent lack of due stratigraphy for, say, the Mitannians,
or the neo-Assyrians, or the Medo-Persians, this pair (not always in perfect
agreement) will attempt to merge any one of these with a far earlier kingdom,
for instance, the ancient Akkadians to be merged as one with the neo-Assyrians.
Lester Mitcham,
however, was able to expose Sweeney’s choices for comparisons using firm
archaeological data in his article, “Support
for Heinsohn’s Chronology is Misplaced” (SIS Chronology
and Catastrophism Workshop, No 1, May 1988).
The Akkadians
and the neo-Assyrians were found to be two quite distinct peoples,
well-separated in time, and speaking and writing quite different languages.
Mitcham
demonstrated similarly the archaeological impossibility of Heinsohn’s and
Sweeney’s bold efforts to fuse the Old Babylonian Dynasty of Hammurabi with the
Persians – King Hammurabi supposedly being the same as Darius the Great.
Once again,
different peoples, different geographies, different times.
Heinsohn and
Sweeney do have, though, some degree of support for their argument that the
Persian Empire, as classically presented, is seriously lacking in due
archaeological strata. For professor Heinsohn, in his far-reaching article, “The
Restoration of Ancient History” (http://www.mikamar.biz/symposium/heinsohn.txt),
refers to the results of some conferences in the 1980’s pointing to
difficulties regarding the extent of the Medo-Persian empires:
In the 1980's, a series of
eight major conferences brought together the world's finest experts on the
history of the Medish and Persian empires. They reached startling results. The
empire of Ninos [pre-Alexander period (3)] was not even mentioned. Yet, its
Medish successors were extensively dealt with-to no great avail. In 1988, one
of the organizers of the eight conferences, stated the simple absence of an
empire of the Medes [pre-Alexander period (2)]: "A Median oral
tradition as a source for Herodotus III is a hypothesis that solves some
problems, but has otherwise little to recommend it ... This means that not even
in Herodotus' Median history a real empire is safely attested. In
Assyrian and Babylonian records and in the archeological evidence no vestiges
of an imperial structure can be found. The very existence of a Median empire,
with the emphasis on empire, is thus questionable" (H.
Sancisi-Weerdenburg, "Was there ever a Median Empire?", in A. Kuhrt,
H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, eds., Achaemenid History III. Method and Theory,
Leiden, 1988, p. 212).
Two years later came the
really bewildering revelation. Humankind's first world empire of the
Persians [Pre-Alexander Period (1)] did not fare much better than the
Medes. Its imperial dimensions had dryly to be labelled
"elusive" (H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, "The quest for an elusive
empire?", in H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, A. Kuhrt, eds., Achaemenid History
IV. Centre and Periphery, Leiden l990, p. 264). ….
Enigma of the Mitannians
In their attempt to counteract what they have perceived
to be the problem of the dearth of solid historical evidence for the Mitannians,
professor Heinsohn and Emmet Sweeney arrived at the conclusion that the Mitanni
and Median empires were one and the same.
Admittedly, the Mitannians seem to be a people
without an adequate archaeology, a series of kings without precise geographical
location.
“The Mitannians are perhaps one of the most
enigmatic Near Eastern Superpowers. Despite their impressive empire, we know
remarkably little about them, especially compared to the Egyptians or the
Hittites”.
“[Mitanni’s] heartland
was the Khābūr River
region, where Wassukkani, its
capital, was probably located”. But: http://www.worldhistory.biz/ancient-history/66326-mitanni.html
“They
established a capital at Wassukanni, the location of which remains unknown”.
“Very little of a
definite nature is known about Mitanni’s leaders, internal history, and
society. It appears that Mitannian society was dominated by a
chariotowning warrior class known as the mary-annu, who owned large country
estates and bred horses and sheep. Some or all of the members of this
class may have been Indo-Europeans, suggesting some sort of cultural
or political fusion of that group and the Hurrians in Mitanni”.
Who were the
Mitannians?
And, might Emmet
Sweeney have - amidst all of his unlikely conclusions - paved the way for an
answer to this question in one of his bold claims: namely, that the Mitannian
king Parratarna was Shamshi Adad I?
I intend further
to investigate this.
Comments