The Aryan Exodus, From Steppe to Throne
'Elite Dominance' in the Cradle of Civilization
It's almost difficult for the modern mind to imagine, and yet, it was once a reality: from the western coasts of Anatolia, stretching all the way to Egypt and Mesopotamia, tall, fair, blue-eyed warriors—ultimately descended from the steppe, Aryans by blood—held dominant control over large swathes of the region for long stretches of time. With their martial prowess and uniquely spirited competence, they shaped the language, culture, and destiny of peoples like the Hittites in Anatolia, the Mitanni in Mesopotamia, very likely the Hyksos in Egypt, and perhaps even the Kassites, leaving a racial and cultural mark that stretched far beyond—a legacy that didn’t stay put, but largely (and gradually) marched north and west across several generations to firmly root itself in Europe.
This is not speculation; this is a factual and provable reality. Our inability to easily conceptualize such a thing testifies to the strange modern bias creeping into the shaping of our history—the politicization and sanitization of history, causing us to twist and contort it to fit egalitarian fantasies.
The resulting ignorance surrounding this broader topic is as deeply frustrating as it is astonishing—and it’s one of the many factors that set me on my own journey to dig deeper and share what I’ve uncovered.
Increasingly, since the end of World War II, many academics, scholars, and historians have painted a simplistic, one-dimensional picture of the ancient world, suggesting that its peoples moved and migrated little and implying that the modern inhabitants of regions like Anatolia, Mesopotamia, or the Levant largely mirror those who lived there millennia ago. In doing so, they sidestep the truth—the most captivating storyline of all—often because it’s deemed controversial or politically inconvenient: much of this region, from around 2000 BC onward, was a domain profoundly shaped by Aryan peoples. Entire swathes of territory, stretching from northeastern Anatolia to Egypt, Mesopotamia, Persia, and India, were dominated by a ruling caste tied to this linguistic and cultural family. Their kurgans—mounded tombs from Ukraine to Anatolia—dot the steppe, silent proof of their immense reach.
Further, it’s a misconception to assume these groups everywhere simply blended into local populations and vanished without a trace, leaving no meaningful connection to modern Europeans. The reality is far more compelling: over the past 3,000 years, countless mass migrations flowed westward and northward, carrying these peoples and their legacies in their wake. Many of those great figures who played leading roles in places like Troy, for instance, are indeed direct ancestors of Europeans today. Scores of both ancient and contemporary texts affirm this plainly—yet recent scholarship twists itself into knots, dismissing it as invention, dishonesty, or misunderstanding, and seemingly doing all it can to sever this connection that was casually accepted as the most plain and obvious truth, just a few generations ago.
This record demands correction, here.
When we fixate solely on Europe’s modern borders when we discuss the history of her peoples, and subsequently treat events in these far-flung regions as peripheral, unimportant, and unrelated, we make such a costly mistake—and we cripple our ability to grasp the full scope of this history. I’d argue it’s an extraordinarily powerful and engaging story, one we have yet to tell properly.. one that I’d suggest we haven’t even begun to do justice.
I’ll begin doing my best to tell portions of it here, in between video episodes on similar subjects, and so this will be the first of much more to come.
In this specific piece, we’ll focus on four separate peoples who had an outsized influence in the area, the Hyksos, Kassites, Mitanni and Hittites, and we’ll end by discussing their influence on Egypt—as these four peoples largely represent the sources of her Aryan/steppe genetics, of the sort recently discovered in several Egyptian royal mummies we’ve been able to test.
The Aryan Saga Begins
Around 2000 BC, Indo-European-speaking pastoralists from the steppe—ancestors of groups like the Yamnaya—began migrating or diffusing their chariot technology and warrior culture southward. Linguistic evidence (e.g., Indo-Aryan and Anatolian branches) and archaeological finds (e.g., spoked-wheel chariots) suggest these movements reached the Near East by 1700 BC.
Rigveda (1.53.9): ‘With your chariot, O Indra, you shatter the forts of the enemy, hurling thunderbolts like the sun’s rays.’
This wasn’t a gentle drift but a bold surge of fresh blood and well-worked bronze, as these steppe riders—physically larger, better organized, and of the most impressive martial pedigree of their age—swept into the ancient world’s heartlands, leaving their genetic and martial fingerprints from Anatolia to Egypt. Their descendants, wielding chariots and a knack for rule, didn’t just pass through; they seized power, forging a legacy of dominion over the Near East. Their chariots’ ruts still scar the earth, from Sintashta to Avaris—hard proof of their impressive range.
Timeline:
Hyksos (1650–1550 BC): Early adopters who wielded chariots to conquer Egypt, their Avaris capital (Tell el-Daba’a) unearthed steppe-style burials. Enjoyed Indo-European innovations (perhaps through contact) hinting at steppe diffusion, with a possible Aryan elite minority among a predominantly Semitic majority shaping their rule.
Kassites (1595–1155 BC): Opportunistic heirs who used borrowed tactics to govern Babylon, they hint at an Indo-European elite influence through names and technology, and their ‘Kudurru’ stones hint at IE solar motifs, as their horse-breeding terms, faintly Indo-European, hint at steppe origins.. though their core identity remains uncertain amidst a largely non-IE population.
Mitanni (1550–1300 BC): Purest bearers of an Indo-Aryan elite overlay atop a Hurrian base population, they dominated with Vedic flair, showing a strong, direct tie to steppe-derived Vedic traditions through their ruling class.
Hittites (1600–1200 BC): Final synthesizers who built an unambiguously Indo-European empire on Anatolian soil, they exhibit a clear linguistic and cultural lineage to the steppe, forging a lasting IE legacy.
The thread begins with steppe migrations (2000 BC), peaks sequentially through each group’s ascendancy, and unravels as regional powers (Assyria, Egypt) reassert control. It’s a tale of martial excellence, wielding chariots as a unifying force, carrying Aryan peoples, ideas, and governance structures—sometimes literally, sometimes figuratively—across the Near East.
Elite Dominance: A Key to Understanding Their Influence
This pattern of small, powerful groups ruling over larger populations is known as 'elite dominance'—a concept where a minority, often wielding superior martial or technological advantages, imposes its culture, language, or governance on a native majority—and across history, Indo-European peoples from the steppe frequently exemplified this, as seen with these four groups: the Hyksos, Kassites, Mitanni, and Hittites, who were not lone actors but part of a vast Indo-European tide sweeping from the steppe between 2000 and 1200 BC. Their long skulls—found from Sintashta to Anatolia—mark their trail.
Whether through conquest, as with the Hyksos in Egypt, or strategic overlay, as with the Mitanni atop the Hurrians, elite dominance explains how Aryan influence efficiently spread, leaving lasting legacies in regions like the Near East and beyond, while across the Aegean, the Mycenaeans—chariot-riding conquerors of Crete and architects of Troy’s mythic wars—spoke an early Greek tied to the same steppe roots, and in Anatolia, the Luwians, kin to the Hittites, carved out kingdoms with languages echoing Nesite, their inscriptions a testament to steppe migrations. Further afield, Phrygians later stormed Anatolia, and Tocharians ventured east to the Tarim Basin, all bearing the linguistic and cultural DNA of the Yamnaya—this was no scattered drift but a singular people family, radiating from a common homeland, their elite dominance reshaping the ancient world from Greece to India—and Egypt, too, experienced the ripple effect, and was (at least for a stretch) heavily influenced. This lens will guide our exploration of their stories.
Anatolia and the Aryan Triumph: A Legacy of Might and Movement
Far from a fleeting ripple, this was a tidal wave of consistent triumph, propelled by the martial prowess and sheer competence of steppe-born warriors who didn’t merely tread across Egypt, Mesopotamia, Anatolia, and beyond—they conquered and ruled, reshaping civilizations through structural ‘elite dominance.’ In Anatolia, this saga stretches to the dawn of recorded history, etched by Indo-European giants like the Luwians and Phrygians, their languages and legacies carved into the land’s stones long before Turkic tribes ever neared, with the Galatians—fierce Celtic warriors whose presence in the area was recognized at least as far back as 300 BC—serving as a later, fascinating strand of that larger Aryan thread. Proficient bands of these masters of war, from the Hyksos seizing Egypt’s throne with ruthless precision, to the Mitanni commanding Mesopotamia’s Hurrians with Vedic authority, and the Hittites forging Anatolia’s might through strategic brilliance, wielded power that belies their numbers. Modern scholars too often paint these as static peoples, frequently assuming and insinuating today’s Egyptians, Iraqis, or Turks are their direct heirs—but this comforting politically correct fable crumbles under the weight of the evidence.
Remarkably, demographics shifted across millennia via a process very familiar to us today—a phenomenon very much akin to ‘white flight,’ spurred by chaos like the Bronze Age collapse around 1200 BC. Entire populations moved, leaving only traces of their Aryan overlords in royal blood and buried bronze, as the Amarna Letters and Hittite annals attest, not unbroken lineages persisting to modern times. To cling to a myth of unchanged ancient populations is to shroud the truth of conquest, competence, and a singular racial and cultural (and linguistic!) family that marched onward, seeding Europe’s roots.
Linguistic Evidence
The centum-satem separation is vital for tracing the spread of Aryan peoples, as it shows how their Proto-Indo-European language diverged—reflecting distinct migration paths from the steppe homeland (circa 3000 BC). This might be thought of a bit like haplogroup markers (r1a, r1b, I, etc), like a fork in the road indicating populations taking divergent paths.
In Anatolia, the centum-speaking Hittites reveal an early Aryan presence, while the satem-speaking Mitanni elite in Mesopotamia bridge this lineage to India’s satem Indo-Aryans (e.g., Vedic composers), with the Hyksos in Egypt and Kassites in Babylon hinting at this same steppe-rooted influence through subtler linguistic echoes. Together, these four—Hittites, Mitanni, Hyksos, and Kassites—illustrate how Aryan peoples dispersed and ruled across the ancient Near East and beyond, linked by a shared linguistic root despite regional adaptations, a legacy we’ll now explore in their remarkable stories.
We’ll start by speaking, in sequential order, to the lesser-known and more mysterious cases of the Hyksos and Kassites, then move through the more obviously and definitively Aryan peoples of the Mitanni and Hittites.
Hyksos
Aside from the maverick Laurence Austine Waddell, few scholars or historians would consider the Hyksos a definitively and completely steppe Aryan people. Most now outright call them a “Semitic” people, but I see problems with this theory. Firstly, a martial and militarily dominant people sweeping down from the north due to their mastery of horse and chariot is an exceedingly Aryan concept—a story we see told and retold countless times throughout history.
Imagine the Hyksos thundering into Egypt, their chariots a blur of dust and bronze, toppling a kingdom with tactics born on distant steppes—a scene Egyptian scribes cursed as the reign of ‘foreign rulers.
It’s hard to believe a supposedly entirely distinct people might carry these same hallmarks, at a time and in a region where Aryan peoples were routinely this dominant force.
Waddell sees them as another Aryan martial elite, emerging from approximately Sumeria and sweeping in from the east. He argued that Hyksos kings had names with Aryan roots, suggesting “Khyan” resembled Indo-European terms for “king” or “chieftain” (e.g., Sanskrit “kshatriya”), and dismissed Semitic interpretations as misreadings by later scholars. He further points out that the Hyksos were closely related to the Hittites and Mitanni—both of whom he classified as Aryan peoples. Hittite raids on Babylon (1595 BC) preceded Hyksos dominance in Egypt, possibly destabilizing the region and enabling their incursions, while Hittite expansion into the northern Levant (1350 BC) overlapped with Hyksos influence in the southern Levant, indicating a shared sphere. One wonders if there was conscious cooperation here.
Leaving Waddell aside for the moment, Vere Gordon Childe, in “The Aryans: A Study of Indo-European Origins” (1926), seems to agree, arguing that the spread of horse-drawn chariots was a signature of Indo-European steppe peoples, believing this to be a branch of that same spread. Flinders Petrie, in “The Hyksos and Israelite Cities” (1901), echoes these points. The Hyksos’ use of advanced metallurgy, especially bronze weapons, mirrors Aryan steppe innovations, though these might have been adopted through trade or migration networks.
Gaston Maspero, in “The Struggle of the Nations” (1896), agreed that names like “Khyan” hinted at an Aryan heritage, drawing parallels with Mitanni Indo-Aryan names. Archibald Henry Sayce, in “The Hittites” (1888), points to another Hyksos ruler’s name, “Iannas,” as having steppe/Aryan heritage. Intriguingly, about 10% of Hyksos names are clearly Indo-European in lineage, possibly suggesting a minority IE element within a predominantly Semitic population—a mixed coalition, perhaps with an Aryan elite leading a Semitic base. James Henry Breasted, in “A History of Egypt” (1905), hinted in this direction, pointing to the intuitive logic of a northern, chariot-mastering population establishing military dominance, a pattern nearly everywhere else tied to Aryan or Indo-European events.
Kassites
To begin with the infamous L.A. Waddell once again, he argues that the Kassites, who ruled Babylon from circa 1595–1155 BC, were descendants of Aryans from Sumer, whom he claimed founded Mesopotamian civilization. He asserted that their name “Kassite” (or “Kashshu” in ancient texts) derived from “Kassi” or “Kushu,” which he linked to a supposed Aryan tribe mentioned in Sumerian and Vedic records—a ruling elite who migrated from Sumer or the Zagros Mountains to dominate Babylon. He argues that Kassite kings bore names with Aryan roots, tying “Gandash” to Sanskrit “Gandha” (power or scent), suggesting a linguistic connection to Indo-European languages.
Waddell emphasized the Kassites’ association with horses and chariots, which he saw as a hallmark of Aryan steppe culture. In The Phoenician Origin of Britons, Scots & Anglo-Saxons (1924), he connected this technology to his broader narrative of Aryan migrations from the Near East to Europe and Asia. He argued their military success in seizing Babylon reflected the prowess of an Aryan warrior aristocracy, akin to the Mitanni or Hittites, and speculated that the Kassites preserved Sumerian-Aryan traditions, such as solar reverence and various rituals.
Max Müller laid the groundwork for linking Indo-European languages to migratory groups like the Kassites. His framework inspired later scholars to interpret Kassite royal names as potentially Indo-European. Archibald Henry Sayce pointed to names like “Karaindash,” speculating it could derive from Indo-European roots akin to Sanskrit “kara” (action) or “indash” (suggestive of Indra), though he admitted the etymology was uncertain. Still, Sayce saw their ruling elite as likely Aryan in origin.
Hugo Winckler, known for his Mitanni discoveries, drew convincing parallels between the Kassites and Mitanni, arguing that the Kassite aristocracy might similarly reflect an Indo-European heritage, citing their prominence in a region influenced by Mitanni Indo-Aryans. Leonard Woolley, in “The Sumerians” (1928), speculated that their unique military success in seizing Babylon suggested a northern origin, possibly linked to steppe-dwelling Indo-European chariot warriors. Vere Gordon Childe agreed, suggesting their rule in Babylon aligned with the timing and methods of Indo-European incursions into the Near East.
Ferdinand Sommer proposed that the Kassites could be an offshoot of the same Indo-European movements that brought the Hittites to Anatolia, seeing their sudden rise as indicative of a small, militarized Indo-European elite imposing itself on Mesopotamia—a pattern he linked to broader Aryan migrations. Stephen Langdon, in “The Cambridge Ancient History” (Vol. I, 1924), speculated that the Kassites’ foreign origin and long-lasting dynasty suggested an Indo-European connection, possibly from the Zagros Mountains or beyond, aligning with theories of steppe migrations.
At the end of the day, we’re left with a familiar evidence picture: linguistic similarities (particularly their names and possible chariot-related vocabulary), their association with horse-based warfare, and their sudden emergence as a ruling elite. It’s the broad strokes that so many scholars found compelling and convincing. While it’s not a silver bullet, it seems a worthy candidate for Occam’s Razor. I can’t help but feel the simplest explanation is likely the correct one, with the caveat that the Kassites might not have always been—or remained—an entirely Aryan people.
Mitanni
At long last, we move to a much clearer and definitive case in the Mitanni. Their golden age (circa 1450–1350 BC) saw them as a major player among the Near Eastern great powers, alongside Egypt, Hatti, and Babylon.
Interestingly and importantly, the majority of Mitanni subjects spoke Hurrian, a non-Indo-European language related to Urartian, suggesting continuity with earlier inhabitants of the region. Hurrian was the common tongue, used in administration and daily life, while only the elite retained Indo-Aryan names and terms, especially in military contexts—reminiscent of the later Scythian model or Gothic rule of Rome. Scholars propose this elite arrived as a small warrior group, imposing themselves on the Hurrians, a pattern seen in countless other Indo-European expansions.
A significant piece of evidence of the Mitanni’s Aryan heritage involves a treaty found in Hittite archives, dating to around 1380 BC, mentioning names like “Artatama” and “Shuttarna”—names with obvious Aryan lineage.
In a treaty from 1380 BC, the Mitanni and Hittites swore by ‘Mitra, Varuna, Indra, and the Nasatya,’ gods of the Vedic pantheon, binding their pact with steppe-born divinity amidst the dust of diplomacy.
“Artatama” is an especially striking variant, resembling Sanskrit “Arta” (truth) and “tama” (highest). Archibald Henry Sayce further tied names like “Tushratta” (from Mitanni correspondence in the Amarna Letters) to Indo-Aryan roots, suggesting “Tush” paralleled Sanskrit “tush” (to satisfy or strengthen), providing further evidence of Indo-European migration into the region.
Hugo Winckler logically argued that this pointed to an “Aryan” aristocracy ruling over a Hurrian population, suggesting a migration of Indo-European elites into Mesopotamia from the north or east. Ferdinand Sommer, in “Hethitisches” (1920), analyzed a Mitanni text by a horse trainer named Kikkuli, discovered in Hittite archives. This manual used Indo-Aryan terms like “aika” (one), “tera” (three), “panza” (five), and “satta” (seven)—direct cognates with Sanskrit “eka,” “tri,” “pancha,” and “sapta.” Sommer argued this specialized vocabulary, tied to chariot warfare, was a hallmark of Indo-Aryan steppe culture, suggesting the Mitanni elite brought this knowledge from an eastern Aryan homeland.
Vere Gordon Childe linked the Mitanni’s mastery of chariots and horses to Indo-European migrations from the Eurasian steppes, citing the Kikkuli text as evidence of an “Aryan” warrior class, noting that chariotry was a defining trait of Indo-European peoples like those who later composed the Rigveda in India.
The term Arya is used 36 times in 34 hymns in the Rig Veda.. and racial or ethnic descriptors are frequent. Some examples—speaking of Indra, and his foes:
"O Lord of all men, fair of cheek, rejoice thee in the gladdening lauds, Present at these drink-offerings."
"At the swift draught the Soma-drinker waxed in might, the Iron One with yellow beard and yellow hair."
"With him too is this rain of his that comes like herds: Indra throws drops of moisture on his yellow beard."
"Thou smotest down the swarthy fifty thousand, and rentest forts as age consumes a garment."
"... blowing away with supernatural might from earth and from the heavens the swarthy skin which Indra hates."
Their fair-haired Indra mirrors the elite’s steppe stock—tall skulls in kurgans match the tale.
Further Historical and Diplomatic Evidence Supporting Elite Aryan Rule
Stephen Langdon, in The Cambridge Ancient History (Vol. I), argued that the Mitanni’s diplomatic prominence—evidenced by their correspondence with Egypt in the Amarna Letters—reflected an Aryan aristocracy ruling over a Hurrian majority. He pointed to their royal names and Vedic gods as proof of an Indo-European origin, likely via migration from the east or north. James Henry Breasted noted the Mitanni’s interactions with Egypt and Hatti, suggesting their kings’ Indo-Aryan names and deities indicated an Aryan elite, part of the same wave of Indo-European movements that influenced Anatolia and India. Leonard Woolley acknowledged the Mitanni’s Indo-Aryan traits, suggesting their rulers were an Aryan minority who imposed themselves on a Hurrian population, citing their chariot-based power and Vedic connections as evidence of a steppe-derived origin.
Laurence Austine Waddell, in The Makers of Civilization in Race and History, though controversial, argued that the Mitanni’s Vedic gods and names linked them to a broader Aryan civilization originating in Sumer or the steppes. He saw their presence in Mesopotamia as part of an Aryan diaspora, reinforcing the idea of an eastern Indo-Aryan homeland. The Mitanni also celebrated the solstice (vishuva), a practice common in IE cultures, further reinforcing their Indo-European roots.
The Mitanni’s power declined after 1350 BC due to internal succession disputes (Artatama II and Tushratta), combined with opportunistic external threats: the Hittite king invaded around 1340 BC, sacking Washukanni and installing a vassal, while Assyria, under Ashur-uballit I (circa 1365–1330 BC), broke free and seized eastern territories. By 1300 BC, Mitanni fragmented and was absorbed by Assyria and the Hittites, with its last rulers vanishing from record and Washukanni’s site—possibly Tell Fekheriye—remaining unconfirmed.
Hittites
William Wright, in The Empire of the Hittites (1884), argued that the Hittites, whose language (Nesite) was Indo-European, represented a clear Aryan migration into Anatolia. He cited inscriptions from Boğazköy and other sites, suggesting their rulers were part of an Aryan elite. Ferdinand Sommer analyzed Hittite texts and emphasized their Indo-European character, seeing their kings as descendants of an Aryan migration from the steppe regions, pointing to linguistic evidence like the Hittite word “watar” (water), akin to Sanskrit “udán.”
Linguistic Evidence: Nesite as Indo-European
Hugo Winckler, who excavated Hattusa, deciphered Hittite cuneiform tablets and identified their language (Nesite) as Indo-European. He cited words like “watar” (water, cf. Sanskrit “udán,” English “water”) and “eku” (to drink, cf. Latin “aqua”), arguing they placed Hittite within the Indo-European family, distinct from Semitic or Hurrian neighbors. Ferdinand Sommer refined this analysis, noting grammatical features like verb conjugations (e.g., “esmi” = I am, cf. Sanskrit “asmi”) and case endings akin to Sanskrit and Greek. He argued Nesite’s archaic traits suggested an early split from the Indo-European trunk, supporting a steppe migration into Anatolia around 2000 BC. Archibald Henry Sayce also championed their Indo-European identity, powerfully linking Nesite to Sanskrit and Greek. He saw their pantheon (e.g., Tarhunt, a god-hero similar to Zeus and Thor) as reflecting Indo-European mythology, reinforcing a linguistic-cultural tie. Hittite retains archaic IE features, such as laryngeals (e.g., ḫ), lost in most other branches, supporting its early split from Proto-Indo-European (PIE).
Chariot Technology: Steppe Influence
Vere Gordon Childe argued that the Hittites’ mastery of chariots—evident in texts like the Anitta Text and their military success—mirrored Indo-European steppe traditions. He tied this to migrations from the Pontic-Caspian region, seeing the Hittites as an Aryan offshoot. William Wright noted chariot depictions in Hittite reliefs (e.g., at Yazılıkaya) and their role in campaigns like the sack of Babylon (1595 BC), suggesting a steppe-derived warrior culture consistent with Indo-European groups. Early Hittite burial practices resembling steppe kurgans (mounded tombs) suggest cultural continuity from IE migrations. Hittites bred and trained horses, a practice rooted in IE steppe traditions, as seen in their treaties and texts.
Historical Context: Migration Narrative
Max Müller’s Indo-European framework influenced later scholars to see the Hittites as migrants from the north. Though he didn’t address them directly, his model of steppe dispersal underpinned their classification as “Aryan” by Sayce and others. Stephen Langdon proposed that the Hittites entered Anatolia around 2000 BC, displacing or assimilating the non-Indo-European Hatti. He cited their Indo-European language and chariot use as evidence of a northern origin, aligning with Mitanni and Vedic parallels.
In short, the Hittites’ Indo-European heritage is best evidenced by Nesite’s linguistic ties to Sanskrit and Greek (Winckler, Sommer, Sayce), their chariot-based military mirroring steppe practices (Childe, Wright), and their fit within Indo-European migration theories (Müller, Langdon). This suggests they descended from a steppe people who entered Anatolia, bringing language and technology.
Egypt’s Aryan Elements
Excavations at El-Amarna, Egypt, reveal that around the mid-2nd millennium BC, kings and princes with unmistakably Vedic names—Artamanya, Aryavirya, Yashodatta, Suttarna, Dushratta—ruled in what’s now Syria, a testament to steppe blood reaching deep into the Near East. Thutmose IV, pharaoh from 1419–1386 BC, wed a daughter of Artatama, king of the Mitanni in the Upper Euphrates region. A letter from Dushratta, Artatama’s grandson, to Akhenaten brags that Thutmose begged seven times before Artatama relented—a marriage that wove Mitanni’s Indo-Aryan elite into Egypt’s royal line.
[Timeline: Thutmose IV 1419–1386 BC, Amenhotep III 1386–1349 BC, Amenhotep IV (Akhenaten) 1350–1334 BC]
This wasn’t a one-off. Amenhotep III, ruling 1386–1349 BC, married Tiy, daughter of Yuaa—a foreigner from North Syria—and Tuau, blending Egyptian and Mitanni ancestry into the 18th Dynasty’s aristocracy.
These unions weren’t just diplomatic; they carried steppe DNA—likely R1b—into Egypt’s veins, a pattern too persistent to ignore. This is just a sampling of Egypt’s ties to these largely Indo-European peoples—Hittites, Mitanni, and more—far too many to list fully here, but enough to show the pharaohs didn’t sit isolated on the Nile.
Importantly, Celtic legends brim with claims of Egyptian roots—tales of Scythian kin or lost tribes, casually dismissed as fluff by modern scholars.
Given the web of steppe migrations and these royal bloodlines, I’ve never been comfortable with the brush-off. The Hittites traded with Troy, the Mitanni sent brides to Thebes, and the Hyksos stormed in with chariots—Egypt was long a crossroads for Aryan threads, not a dead end. To briefly summarize a handful of the connections we can be certain of:
Hyksos-Egypt Connections
Hyksos rulers (c. 1650–1550 BC) adopted Egyptian titles and iconography (e.g., scarabs), suggesting intermarriage with local elites, possibly blending Semitic and Aryan ancestry, marking the New Kingdom (c. 1550–1070 BC) with steppe influence. They introduced steppe-derived technologies—composite bows, bronze weapons, spoked-wheel chariots, and horses—shaping Egyptian military practices and hinting at Aryan cultural diffusion from steppe origins (e.g., Sintashta).
Mitanni-Egypt Connections
Amenhotep III (c. 1390–1352 BC) married Mitanni princesses Gilukhepa and Tadukhepa, and the Mitanni sent additional princesses with dowries, bringing Indo-Aryan elite bloodlines into the 18th Dynasty, though diluted by Egypt’s population, enhancing New Kingdom steppe ties. From the Hittite tale of a great flood to India’s Manu surviving the deluge, these peoples carried a shared steppe myth of rebirth—a story Egypt glimpsed through Mitanni brides. Mitanni dowries (textiles, jewelry), horse-breeding expertise (e.g., Kikkuli’s methods), and chariot gifts (Amarna Letters) embedded steppe aesthetics and techniques, while rare IE loanwords (e.g., military terms) suggest linguistic diffusion.
Hittite-Egypt Connections
Ramesses II (c. 1279–1213 BC) married Maathorneferure and another Hittite princess after Kadesh (1274 BC), blending Aryan Anatolian lineage with Egyptian royalty via treaty, reinforcing New Kingdom steppe influence. Hittite letters, gifts (e.g., silver tablets), treaty language, and heavy chariot adoption introduced steppe-derived diplomacy and innovations into Egyptian culture.
Kassite-Egypt Connections
Kassite Babylon’s 18th Dynasty letters (e.g., Amarna Letters, EA 7–11) suggest elite ties, with speculation of a Kassite princess marrying a pharaoh (e.g., Amenhotep III), potentially adding Indo-Aryan-influenced ancestry to New Kingdom Egypt. Kassite gifts (lapis lazuli, seals) and trade via the Zagros near Indo-Iranian steppe regions brought subtle IE motifs, echoed in Egyptian reliefs.
Considering these ties and the powerful interconnectedness of the elites of these five peoples, it becomes far easier to explain the R1b (Gad et al. 2020, published in Human Molecular Genetics) and similar Y-DNA haplogroup markers—found today almost exclusively in modern Europeans—discovered in Egyptian royal mummies. These studies show that Tutankhamun and his family had DNA markers shared by 50-75% of northwestern Europeans today, yet less than 3% of modern Egyptians.. Tutankhamun’s specific R1b-M269, a marker tied to the Yamnaya steppe riders, clearly speaks to an Aryan elite who ruled, bred, and vanished—leaving Egypt’s modern sons a shadow of that lineage. As shocking as this may be to the average person, it’s entirely unsurprising to those who truly know the history of this region and its peoples.. the entirety of the cultural and genetic record proclaims it.
In short, the region stretching from ancient Anatolia to Egypt, through Mesopotamia and into Persia and India—the epicenter of mankind’s earliest recorded history and civilizations—seems to have been largely dominated by a singular people family across a vast stretch of time. A family of Arya warriors whose blood flowed from steppe kurgans to pharaohs’ tombs, their R1a and R1b threads weaving a tapestry of conquest that still drapes over Europe’s shoulders today. Yet somehow, we’ve largely lost our understanding of this, and our grasp on history in this regard. I can’t help but feel this rewriting and obscuring of history is being done for political and social reasons, and the whole thing strikes me as practically criminal.
Take Troy, perched on Anatolia’s edge—an ancient epicenter of power and wealth, a city of bronze and heroic blood where chariot lords like Hector and Achilles clashed, their feats of greatness an extension of the traditions of the steppe riders who swept south millennia before. Were these the Hittites’ kin—fair-haired/eyed/skinned Aryans whose blood inspired Homer’s epic chants?
Many modern scholars and historians have taken to pretending we can’t possibly have direct connections to these far-flung events—but this is madness, and an outright dismissal of source materials. Our ancestors roamed, adventured, and settled the entire region surrounding Troy and much further afield.. their kurgans from Sintashta to Saqqara still hold their bones. Their DNA whispers in us—R1b in Tutankhamun, R1a in Corded Ware—unbroken from steppe to now. When we lose sight of this, it’s the equivalent of lopping off several limbs of our historical body. There’s no need for it, and it’s an entirely net-negative misstep. To forget them is to orphan ourselves.
We must have a clear understanding of the full scope of our history if we’re to best understand ourselves, our fathers, and our place in the world.. their steppe fire still burns in us, as we hold the baton they’ve passed us—let’s hoist this saga high, a banner for our blood, and march it into tomorrow.
I look forward to speaking to these connections in even more depth in the future.
Thank you. I have been waiting for you to mention the Kassites. If you ever choose to go down that rabbit hole, I have quite a number of things that you'll find interesting. The Kassites are the first. Aryans, are of them. Kashmir, kashgar, kizzuwatna, Gens Cassia of Rome. The Kassites were a people that were excellent by virtue of virtue itself. A great book that you might like is The God Kings of Europe by Hugh Montgomery. He figured out by good scholarship what i figured out by chasing rabbits. He explains where the Goths come from, and a few other things of interest.
I could literally go on forever about these people, but the magic of it all would be ruined, because there story will literally reveal itself to you if you look. Then you'll understand what makes me so obsessed. Have fun good sir!
Excellent work! This period in history is so fascinating because it is so obscure/mysterious. Have you taken a look at Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett's works, such as "The Trojan War of 650 BC" and "Moses in the Hieroglyphs"? They are blacklisted/demonized in a similar way to Waddel. I don't agree with all their points, but they raise a fascinating analysis on Ancient Egypt and Troy, chronological issues in the Ancient Near East, and issues with carbon dating obfuscations/deceptions. There is also a most intriguing book, "Where Troy Once Stood" by Iman Wilkens that points to a more Northern/Western origin for the first Troy featured in Homer's beautiful "Iliad" that was later conveyed to Greece by migrating/invading peoples. I just wanted to share those titles since they are very fascinating and offer good points and wondered if you had read them at all.
Thank you for your content! You were the one who opened my eyes (your Alexander the Great video is what got me hooked and down the rabbit hole, so to speak) to what's really going on and History's powerful truths, for which I hold you in the highest regard. I always enjoy hearing/watching your videos and reading your content and the level of insightful depth you apply to each of them. It is always a deep joy when a new one appears! Thank you!