Chariots (was horse argument) 2/2

[a.a. slaczka]

My previous message was NOT meant for the Indology list, so just don't pay
attention to it.
Sorry for the confusion!!!
A.Slaczka.

----------
> Van: a.a. slaczka <alxandra at STAD.DSL.NL>
> Aan: INDOLOGY at LISTSERV.LIV.AC.UK
> Onderwerp: Re: Chariots (was horse argument) 2/2
> Datum: maandag 27 april 1998 20:31
>
> In mijn woordenboek staat dat kwartel een vogel is!!!!
> En nu?
> M.
>
> ----------
> > Van: Vidhyanath Rao <vidynath at MATH.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
> > Aan: INDOLOGY at LISTSERV.LIV.AC.UK
> > Onderwerp: Chariots (was horse argument) 2/2
> > Datum: vrijdag 5 juni 1998 22:18
> >
> > Michael Witzel <witzel at FAS.HARVARD.EDU> wrote:
> >
> > >On Fri, 29 May 1998, Vidhyanath Rao wrote:
> > >
> > >> I thought that I had made it clear that I believe the true chariot
to
> > >> have been diffused from the Near East, not India. This has nothing
to
> > >> do with the spread of IE languages.
> >
> > >But the very word for "horse", horse driving, horse mythology, horse
> > >rituals go *together* in IE cultures.... Diffusion from a post-common
IE
> > >center does not work here.
> >
> > Word for horse does not prove chariots.
> >
> > I guess I am totally ignorant. What PIE words are unquestionably
> > connected to chariotry? [Let us concentrate on chariots in this
> > thread.]
> >
> > >> Anyway, are you arguing that chariots had been invented before I-Irs
> > >> and proto-Greeks separated?
> >
> > >We cannot know perfectly. [...] However, this is nothing unusual. We
> > >cannot, I think, reconstruct the IE small finger. That does not mean
> > >that IEs had only 4 fingers... (and, I think, there is a Proto-Drav.
> > >peacock feather, but .... no peacock)
> >
> > The situations are different. We have independent evidence that humans
> > had a little finger before PIE evolved. But there is no evidence that
> > true chariots existed before 1800 BCE.
> >
> > >But, unfortunately, we have Homer's "Indian style" description of the
> > >race. If you then invoke the Hittites as transmitters, we are stuck
with
> > >Kikkuli, the *Indo-Aryan*-inspired Mitanni.
> >
> > A minor point: Kikkuli was a Hurrian, as were the young men recruited
> > into the mariannu (and according to Diakonoff, that word has a
> > satifactory Near Eastern etymology.
> >
> > Anyway, there are books on Nyaya in one of our libraries. Bulk of the
> > books on formal logic are in a different library. If a visitor from
> > Alpha Centauri were to look only at the first and concluded that Frege
> > et. al were inspired by Indians, would it be correct?
> >
> > The point is that we have fragments of other texts on horses and
> > chariots from the Hittite archives. Chariots are mentioned in >military
> > context<, used by both Hittites and Hurrians, during the >Old Hittite
> > period<, almost 300 years before Kikkuli.
> >
> > And what is the evidence for claiming that Mitannis' methods were
> > better? Bear in mind that the Hittite archives contained other texts on
> > horse training. Just because, by chance, one text has come complete
> > while others have not, we cannot conclude that the former is better.
> >
> > >> >the uneven number of turns
> > >> >with the Mitanni, the COUNTER-clockwise turning .... : all by
> > >> >diffusion?
> >
> > >> The odd number of turns is a consequence of the race, which consists
> of
> > >> returning to the starting point after reaching a preset mark. If you
> > >> run n laps, you must make 2n+1 turns.
> >
> > I am sorry for yet another fence-post error. If there are n circuits,
> > there would be 2n-1 turns.
> >
> > >The turn (vartana) is around the pole at the end of the track. [...]
> > >Yes, but there also is 1 turn only: Thus, 1 turn: up to the post and
> back;
> > >2 turns = 2x the same; 3 turns = 3x etc. Only the turn around the post
> at
> > >the "end" of the track is counted. But only *odd* numbers are used.
Why?
> >
> > I did not know that only the turn at the end was counted. I will
> > appreciate textual citations that prove this (for each culture
> > involved).
> >
> > >> But bits were completely unknown in India, according to Arrian and
> > >> others. Why was it so, if there were two different traditions?
> >
> > >Arrian? Where? In the quoted passage, he onlys says that they have a
> > >management different from the Greek + Celtic one. (Indike 16).
> >
> > You are right. I should have said that bits were not in use in India
> > and that the statements of Arrian and others supports this. Also,
> > archaeological evidence supports the conclusions that bits were
> > introduced into India only in historical times. See Leshnik AJA 1971
> > pp. 141--150 as well as Sparreboom, Chariots in the Veda, p. 115-117.
> >
> > So the question remains:If there was a continuity of domesticated
horses
> > from bit using people to early historical India, why was there a change
> > from bits to nose bands when the latter are inferior due to
constriction
> > of air passages?
> >
> > --------------
> >
> >
> > >(if imported from the Near East you would use the Near Eastern
> > >term,like gilgul 'wheel': see below).
> >
> > Not always. People use loan translations too.
> >
> > >Unfortunately she is not an Indo-Europeanist but a well known Russian
> > >archaeologist, and, AT THAT, horse woman herself. Not an ivory tower
> > >woman. (Neither do I belong to that tower myself, nor Sparreboom who
has
> > >driven chariots a lot, *before* and after his thesis).
> >
> > What matters is experience with reconstructed harness + vehicles.
> > I have written to Sparreboom concerning this, among other questions
> > about chariot construction and use that come from what he says in his
> > book. It would be proper for me wait for his reply before discussing
> > them here.
> >
> > Modern harnessing is far removed from ancient practices. Even minor
> > changes can make adjustment tricky. There were a lot of experienced
> > drivers who were tripped by rear mounted engines which affect the
> > handling characteristics. And few of them are able to explain the
> > physics behind it.
> >
> > That is why, till I see description of experiments with reconstructed
> > harnesses, bridling and vehicles that contradict them, I will continue
> > to accept the conclusions of Spruytte. No such experiments are
described
> > by Sparreboom or Kuzmina. So I see no reason to change my conclusions.
> >
> > >Simply, because the Hittites *imported* a Mitanni man, Kikkuli, to
teach
> > >them [better methods].
> >
> > A minor point: Kikkuli was a Hurrian (and the maryannu were recruited
> > from among Hurrians).
> >
> > Anyway, this text was found in an archive, where fragments of other
> > texts dealing with horses and chariots were found. All of us buy books
> > for our collections when we already know what is in those books.
Finding
> > this one book does not imply that Hittites imported Kikkuli to >teach<
> > them.
> >
> > >One does not import and employ people whom one does not need.
> >
> > But one does buy books one does not really need. And as a glance
> > around any US university or software company will show, people
> > can be imported for reasons other than total lack of knolwedge/
> > inferior technology in the importing country.
> >
> >
> >
> > -Nath