It is well-documented that the ancient Israelite tribes came into contact with Indo-European groups in Canaan such as the Philistines (P'lishtim) (most likely migrants from Crete), and later the Greeks (Yavanim) after the invasion of Alexander the Great in the fourth century BCE.

But were there contacts prior to these examples? The Israelites are recorded as dealing with Hittites in Canaan as early as Abraham (Genesis 23), even involving intermarriage by Esau and Solomon (26:34, 27:46, 36:2; 1 Kings 11:1), later on Ezekiel even describes the Israelites as descending from a Hittite progenitress (16:3, 45)! They were employed as mercenaries (1 Samuel 26:6, 2 Samuel 11:6; 2 Kings 7:6) and are described as residing in the hill-country of central Canaan (Exodus 3:8, 17, 13:5, 23:23, 28, Numbers 13:29) and between the Euphrates and the Mediterranean (Joshua 1:4; Judges 1:26). What sort of impact did this have on society?

Is there any evidence of contact with other groups, such as the Indo-European elements of Mitanni, or with the Indo-Iranians (e.g., in language, pottery, customs, weaponry, etc)?

  • 3
    Not sure if the Bible is your best - and most true-full source - in this matter. The Old Testament is written by, for, and about Jews, and while it's nicely crafted piece of propaganda, it doesn't always mesh with other sources (eg. written records by Egypt and Babylon) nor archeological evidence. It is after all in part justification and encouragement for the stealing of land already settled by other people back then. – Baard Kopperud Aug 16 '15 at 20:51
  • @BaardKopperud, are there other sources that would have pertinent information? Unfortunately, the Mitanni did not leave written records, and Hittite writings are fragmentary or minimal. The Greek sure left a lot, but that unfortunately dates to a much later time period. – Meir Illumination Aug 17 '15 at 8:35
  • 6
    You know the Persians (essentially the entire axis the Torah was written around) were Indo-European too, right? – T.E.D. Aug 17 '15 at 17:50
  • @T.E.D., thanks for commenting! Sure do, there's been interesting work done in that area lately, eg by Secuda and Knoppers; I presume you're referring to the Persian Empire, which was the social & political context for the first coalescence and widespread dissemination of the Hebrew corpus. But the PE expanded into the ANE the 2nd half of the 1st millennium on, much later than I'm interested in (2nd to start of 1st millennium BCE). (And yes, some parts of those Hebrew texts are dated to Late Bronze/Early Iron Ages). I'm more interested in Hittite, Egyptian, neo-Assyrian, Mycaenean etc sources – Meir Illumination Aug 17 '15 at 19:35
  • 3
    I'm not sure what the question is. The title of the question is whether or not the Israelites had contact with Indo-Europeans, but the first and second paragraphs establish that they did and then ask whether or not this contact influenced their society, and the final paragraph asks whether or not they had contact with Indo-Iranians. Which one of those questions do you want answered? – Shimon bM Feb 1 '17 at 5:00

Taken in the spirit it was asked, as I take it, I would suggest looking into the Hurrians, who Biblical scholars have associated with the Horites and Hivites mentioned in the Bible. However, there is something quite unique about the Hurrians in that apparently, according to language at least, they were neither Semitic nor Indo-European, yet once occupied a sizeable portion of the ANE and penetrated down into Canaan at one point to settle, which is why the Hivites are mentioned in the list of nations which Israel would have to drive out of the land.

According to the Wikipedia article on the Hurrians:

The Hurrians spoke an ergative, agglutinative language conventionally called Hurrian, which is unrelated to neighbouring Semitic or Indo-European languages, and may have been a language isolate.

The Hurrians also had a presence in the Mittannian Empire. The aforementioned article mentions the following:

Texts in the Hurrian language in cuneiform have been found at Hattusa, Ugarit (Ras Shamra), as well as in one of the longest of the Amarna letters, written by King Tushratta of Mitanni to Pharaoh Amenhotep III.

Edward Lipiński in an article titled "Hurrians and Their Gods in Canaan" in the Polish journal Rocznik Orientalistyczny (2016) mentions:

The first appearance of Hurrians and of personages bearing Indo-Aryan names in citystates of ancient Canaan can be dated to the late 16th century B.C. and be related to the expansive influence of the Mittannian empire.

Hurrian names are attested on tablets that have been discovered in Canaan, such as in Hebron. So that is at least one ancient people group who Israel had contact with from the northern ANE who penetrated southward into the Semitic lands.

As for possible biblical tie-ins aside from the conquest of Canaan it has been suggested that remnants of the Hurrian population continued until the time of King David, as in the article by Aharon Kempinski for Biblical Archaeology Review (1979) titled "Hittites in the Bible: What Does Archaeology Say?", which mentions the following:

The evidence from Jerusalem, however, for the identification of the Jebusites as a Hittite tribe is insufficient. The pre-Davidic population more likely included mainly Hurrian (a population whose origin was in southeastern Anatolia) elements. ... Remnants of the Hurrian population may have dwelled in ancient Israel up to the time of David. The title for the king of pre-Davidic Jerusalem is ha-Aravna (2 Samuel 24-16). This title has been metathesized (that is, the letters were transposed) from ewri-na, which means “the lord” in Hurrian.

I've seen other articles about the Hurrians in Canaan in the past but that is just a sampling of the information available.

| improve this answer | |

I do not think there was a lot of contact, but for what it worth, it is usually assumed that Proto-Indo-European words for "six" su̯ecs and "seven" septm were borrowed from a Semitic language.

There were other borrowings, like the Semitic word for wine, but it can more easily be explained by trade rather than direct contact.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.