Chariots (was horse argument) 2/2

Vidhyanath Rao vidynath at MATH.OHIO-STATE.EDU
Sun Jun 14 12:30:40 UTC 1998

Michael Witzel <witzel at FAS.HARVARD.EDU> wrote:

> > I guess I am totally ignorant. What PIE words are unquestionably
> > connected to chariotry? [Let us concentrate on chariots in this
> > thread.]
> I think I gave a few last time and detailed the difficulties with them.

So not unquestionably. All we are left with are really ek'wo, yugo

> > The point is that we have fragments of other texts on horses and

There is some thing left out here. I have been unable to find a source
for my belief that some of the texts are older than Kikkuli. So
I did not wish to assert it. It is the use of chariots in war that
is definitely attested in the Old Kingdom period.

> > period<, almost 300 years before Kikkuli.
> Fine, but the question remains. Why Kikkuli at all? The Hittite texts are
> from a State Archive. You do not copy 'official' texts just "to have the
> book". They all (including myths) have  their purpose.

What is the purpose of an archive? Archives often contain all sorts of

> > And what is the evidence for claiming that Mitannis' methods were
> > better?
> Better? Did I say so? -- maybe different, maybe better for certain
> training situations, I vaguely remember some study to that effect:

A paranthetical remark was `(better)'.

> But (2), Avestan also has: races with not just one turn (Mitanni
> aika-vartana) in a race but more (Mit. tri-, panza-, satta-, nava-vartana)
> are also reflected, then of course requiring TWO turning points: "like
> horses wanting to reach the turning point in front (fratara- uruaEsa-)
> from the one in the back (apara- uruuaEsa-)." Vistasp Yast 29

Two turning points => 2n-1 turns for n circuits. Precisely what I said

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list