[SunkenCiv]

The Chaldean language is a type of Aramaic; it used to be called Syriac, which figures, because Aramaic takes its name from Aram (Syria).

Due to some old biases, Mitanni was conjured up, but is really an anachronistic echo of the Medes. They first show up in Assyrian records from the 9th c BC, and in classical Greece, the term Medes was used interchangeably with Persians.

The Medes were more or less allied with the Babylonians, and the Scythians with the Assyrians. At some point the Scythians were persuaded to switch sides, and the three powers stormed Nineveh and brought an end to the Assyrian Empire, although there were minor Assyrian rulers thereafter, and they still exist as an ethnic group in the Middle East.

https://www.varchive.org/tac/end.htm

https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/4065042/posts?page=30#30

[SunkenCiv]

(from the earlier FR link)

https://www.varchive.org/ce/theses.htm (189, 190)

http://www.varchive.org/tac/hararch.htm

http://www.varchive.org/dag/trowar.htm

http://www.varchive.org/tac/dakhamun.htm

http://www.varchive.org/ce/baalbek/carchemish.htm

http://www.varchive.org/ce/baalbek/baw.htm

[M Kehoe]

Thank you.

5.56mm

[Cronos]

Wait. You’re saying the Mitanni were Medes? I thought they were related to the Hittites

[PIF]

... was conjured up

—
That, sadly, seems to pervade science these days.

[nwrep]

I am surprised you are linking to Immanuel Velikovsky, whose theories have been rejected as profoundly ahistorical and fantastical, and who wrote at the height of the 20th century Biblical skepticism, when a lot of archaeological explorations had yet to vindicate and reveal the history of many ancient sites.