Talk:Chariot

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

I wish you would revert your reversions. My regrouping wasn't by language per se, but by cultural traditions. And I split the Persian/Assyrian thing because it didn't actually say anything about Assyrian use. I think the article needs a lot of work, and I think I took it a big step in the right direction. — B.Bryant 11:45, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I agree it needs a lot of work. Grouping by "Indo-European", however is not a step in the right direction. The first spoke-wheeled chariots may have been Indo-Iranian, but certainly not Proto-Indo-European, and there is no IE "heritage" that is different from general technological transfer. Current organization is chronological:

  • Sumerian "proto chariots" (no spokes): before 2600
  • hypothesized Indo-Iranian early chariots, ca. 2000
  • China, ca 1700 (I agree that China is difficult to classify. We need more information on that, and may have to move the section further down not to break the "Ancient Near East" chronology
  • Egypt, ca. 1600
  • Hittites, Assyria ca. 1300
  • Persia, ca. 600 BC
  • Greeks, originally the section treated the time from ca. 400 BC. The mycenaean section may be separated, now and moved together with "Ancient Near East".
  • Celts ca. 500 BC-100 AD
  • Roman until ca. 500 AD
  • Tachanka

dab 11:55, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Because we don't have very much material yet on Egypt, Assyria, Hittites, Assyria, we may lump the sections together. It was the same cultural sphere. We can take them apart again as more material accumulates. dab 11:55, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)


All sections (except maybe the classical antiquity one) desperately need more material. Most desperately the Chinese section, and also the Indo-Iranian one. What are the individual archaeological finds? What interpretations are there? We also need material on Assyria/Babylonia, and more on the variants of chariot design in the Ancient Near East. dab 12:03, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Celts/Britons

Would it be more accurate to change 'Celt'to 'Briton' in the Iron Age sections? The Gauls did use them, but the use had died out by Classical times and I understand that the only evidence we have for them comes from Britain.

Mon Vier 17th March 2006

[edit] celtic

what are the references for first century use of celtic chariots in battle? Battle of Watling Street mentions no chariots. dab (ᛏ) 07:01, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] map

I did a rough map of the historical spread of the chariot. clearly, I will yet refine it and provide a legend dating the various colours, but I uploaded it already so people can criticize. comments? dab (ᛏ) 07:19, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Indo-Iranians?

Why you think that Aryans was 'Indo-Iranians', aryans lived in Central Asia. Now There are turks, not iranians. I think that turks is descendants of Aryans.

Well, I guess you need to reed some books, pal. --Barbatus 13:25, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] What I essed

I don't see any mention of the essed. (What people called their chariots that, I don't recal...) Also, I don't see any mention of what I understand was standard practise for earlier chariots: transport only, not actually fighting from them (as commonly believed). Can anybody clarify? Trekphiler 18:36, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I feel the need for horses

I've read (somewhere...) the most prestigious event at the ancient Olympics was the chariot race. Trekphiler 03:38, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

wouldn't it be extremely cool to re-introduce the chariot race as an Olympic discipline? I think even I would watch it on TV then. dab (ᛏ) 07:24, 28 February 2006 (UTC)


[edit] So who invented it?

Currently, the article eschews to answer the question who invented the chariot. There are two contradicting answers: the Sumerians and the Indo-Iranians. As I understand, the Sumerian chariot was a proto-chariot. It would be helpful to delineate the difference between Sumerian and Indo-European chariots in the text and to indicate why the Indo-European chariot was superior. --Ghirla -трёп- 23:30, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] equestrianism

I've deleted the following passage. Assuming that "equestrianism" means horse-riding, I thought that it was generally accepted that the earliest domesticated horses were too small to ride:

It is generally disputed whether the invention of the wheel or the domestication of the horse occurred first. This would have affected whether the use of equestrianism in warfare or chariot riding would have influenced ancient warfare first, and thus both of their places in the timeline of the development of civilization. Paul B 00:13, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mitannians and Chariot Warfare

The following is the justification used for deleting the sentence: "The introduction of horse training and chariots for warfare to the Bronze Age Ancient Near East seems to be due to the Mitanni." This sentence appears at the beginning of the "Hittite" section.

  1. ca. 2000 - 1800 BC: Sintashta and Krivoe Ozero chariot burial radio-carbon dates
  2. Earliest depictions of a two-wheeled, spoked, horse-drawn chariot:
    • ca. 1906 - ca. 1830: Anatolia - karum Kanish II era cylinder seals
    • Teracotta plaque from Uruk - Believed to be contemporary or slightly later than the Anatolian seals
  3. 18th - 17th centuries BC: Numerous seals from Syria depicting the continuing evolution of the chariot - first depictions of two-man true chariots. Connections between the platform and straddle cars of previous eras to the true chariot are clear in these depictions.
  4. Late 18th century: The Anitta text mentions that the ruler of Salatiwara marched against Anitta, bringing "1,400 troops, (and) 40 teams of horses". The "teams of horses" is believed to be a reference to chariots, as that is how they were sometimes referred to.
  5. ca. 1650 - 1620: The use of chariots in warfare is textually well established by such Hittite documents as "The Seige of Ursu" and the annals of the reign of Hattusili I. The Palace Anecdotes compiled by Mursili I explicitly discuss the training of chariot warriors.
  6. ca. 1497 - 1482 BC: First appearance of Mitanni, as "Maittani", in an inscription believed to date from the reign of Thutmose I of Egypt.
  7. First half of 15th century BC - Reign of Idri-mi of Alalah, who submitted himself to the Mitannian king Parattarna. Parattarna is believed to have had two predecessors, Shuttarna, and before him Kirta, the supposed founder of the Mitannian dynasty. Kirta is tentatively placed at the beginning of the 15th century, but could be pushed back into the late 16th century. His very existence, however, is uncertain.
  8. Late(?) 15th century BC - The oldest versions of the Kikkuli of Mittanni horse-training text were composed in Middle Hittite.

If these dates are accepted, then you can see that the Hittites, and indeed all of Mesopotamia, were using chariots before the rise of Mitanni. This would mean that, while the Hittites may have acquired new chariot skills/techniques from the Mitannians, it was simply another stage in chariot evolution, not its introduction. In regard to this sentence under question, it is worth noting that there is a school of thought that the chariot developed in Mesopotamia. Even with the Sintashta and Krivoe Ozero evidence, this cannot be dismissed out of hand, as the available Mesopotamian artwork depicts no sudden jump in chariot development, but rather a smooth evolution of forms.

I will resist deleting the sentence in question a second time until this discussion has had a chance to be reveiwed and commented on.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/h/a/Talk%7EChariot_859d.html"