HORSE

In this article I show that modern Sumerology is somewhat a fraud. Yet I trust that guys did some good work and did restore some words properly. Not because those match Persian and Arabic. That would be expected from faked texts. Not because some words are Persian only, which breaks the official History timeline. That might have been an oversight of some "creative" linguists.

The most trustworthy finding of Sumerologists is that Sumerians didn't have horses: they used donkeys and donkey-onager hybrids (onager on the right: just 50% of horse weight). The hybrid was called kunga, the word might be an origin of Slavic конь konj (male horse). This fact wouldn't mean much 4000+ years ago. But since I know that Sumerians existed in Dark Ages, this simple fact explains A LOT.

1) No saddles, no stirrups, no cavalry, even after chariots appeared. How hard is saddle/stirrup compared to chariot? The secret is that it's not horses on those frescoes and reliefs but kungas. You don't need stirrup/saddle to ride a donkey, but you can't ride a donkey or kunga into battle: they are slow, small and somewhat stubborn. The best you can do is a chariot because they are strong enough to pull it, and if you beat them, they will run faster, and, in a chariot, there is no risk of them throwing you off.

2) Bulgars, Hungarians, Crimean Tatars (Ukraine), Lipka Tatars (Poland), - they made it that far West because Europeans have never seen a horse before.

3) Macedonian Alexander became a great leader because his cavalry was suddenly on par with that of Persian Empire. Horses just appeared in the region. Macedonians bought them from Bulgars, who settled North of Macedonia.

4) Word باره bara/barag literally means horse in Persian. Magical lightning fast Buraq that Muhammad rides is actually a horse. Probably first horse he's ever seen. All he's seen before were kungas and donkeys, no wonder he's amazed. When the word "horse" is used in Quran they probably meant "kunga".