Was the wheel known in America before Viking Age?
I_E_Johansson
http://www.cristobalcolondeibiza.com/2eng/2eng12.htm#pto10
where it say:
"The wheel was indeed known in America. On the left, pottery toy with wheels
in Taxila (India), second century BC. Taxila is situated 33º 44´N and 72º
49´E, 45km NW of Rawalpindi. On the right, dog or deer with painted muzzle
and eyes. In Veracruz, Mexico (ca. 500 AD)."
Not knowing much about the site in Veracruz I can't help wondering, can this
be true? I doubt that the tool to the right could show anything but wheels,
but hasn't it been argued that there were no wheels in Ancient America
before people from the Old World, Vikings or later explorers and migrators
introduced the wheel. What's your thoughts? Is other alike artifacts known
from Mexico or elsewhere?
Inger E
Alan Crozier
news:x157f.148972$dP1.5...@newsc.telia.net...
I think the problem was not that they didn't have the wheel in America, but
that they did not have draught animals.
Alan
--
Alan Crozier
Lund
Sweden
Philip Deitiker
news:yp57f.36634$d5.1...@newsb.telia.net:
> I think the problem was not that they didn't have the wheel in
America, but
> that they did not have draught animals.
llamas
markovic
histories of North American natives. Dogs would drag sticks, with the
cargo attatched to the stick.
Uwe Müller
"Alan Crozier" <name1...@telia.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:yp57f.36634$d5.1...@newsb.telia.net...
AFAIK they had the wheel (meaning in some sites in SA toys with wheels were
found), but it was not used for transportation as they lacked suitable
roads. Wheeled transportation is best developed in flat areas and with
developed socieries, that have need of mass transportation. Having the
Andean mountains in the way can show technological difficulties in even the
best design.
have fun
Uwe Mueller
Alan Crozier
news:Xns96F961...@128.249.2.19...
in Mexico?
Philip Deitiker
I thought it said America, last time I checked america extended
from argentina to alaska.
VtSkier
Have you ever seen llamas being used to draw
a wagon?
VtSkier
> "Alan Crozier" <name1...@telia.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:yp57f.36634$d5.1...@newsb.telia.net...
>
>>"I_E_Johansson" <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote in message
>>news:x157f.148972$dP1.5...@newsc.telia.net...
>>
>>>Had some ref sent to me the other day. Among them an url to
>>> http://www.cristobalcolondeibiza.com/2eng/2eng12.htm#pto10
>>>
>>>where it say:
>>>"The wheel was indeed known in America. On the left, pottery toy with
>>
>>wheels
>>
>
> 72ş
>
>>>49´E, 45km NW of Rawalpindi. On the right, dog or deer with painted
>
> muzzle
>
>>>and eyes. In Veracruz, Mexico (ca. 500 AD)."
>>>
>>>Not knowing much about the site in Veracruz I can't help wondering, can
>>
>>this
>>
>>>be true? I doubt that the tool to the right could show anything but
>>
>>wheels,
>>
>>>but hasn't it been argued that there were no wheels in Ancient America
>>>before people from the Old World, Vikings or later explorers and
>
> migrators
>
>>>introduced the wheel. What's your thoughts? Is other alike artifacts
>
> known
>
>>>from Mexico or elsewhere?
>>
>>I think the problem was not that they didn't have the wheel in America,
>
> but
>
>>that they did not have draught animals.
>>
>
>
> AFAIK they had the wheel (meaning in some sites in SA toys with wheels were
> found), but it was not used for transportation as they lacked suitable
> roads. Wheeled transportation is best developed in flat areas and with
> developed socieries, that have need of mass transportation. Having the
> Andean mountains in the way can show technological difficulties in even the
> best design.
>
> have fun
>
> Uwe Mueller
Certainly there were developed societies in both south th
and central America. There were tracts of flat area where
wheels might have been useful. I think lack of suitable
draft animals is the best answer. Someone suggested
llamas. A fairly small, light animal with an erect neck/
head. I can see problems with a proper harness that doesn't
choke the beast. Remember that horses were use mainly for
light work until the development of the horse collar
which transferred loads to shoulders. Oxen were the
bulldozers of transport for thousands of years. Even if
a respectable harness could have been developed for llamas,
the problem of weight (horsepower) still exists.
VtSkier
Philip, read a little closer. The wheeled toy was
from Mexico. There are no llamas in Mexico (at least
they are not natural there and they are not
portrayed in art there and no bones have been
found AFAIK).
However, as I pointed out in another post, wheeled
toys have apparently been found in South America.
Then I went on to discuss the unsuitability of llamas
as draft animals. Draft animals are used for pulling
something, not carrying something.
Someone mentioned dogs as potential draft animals.
Certainly possible and used in the far north, where
wheels aren't practical anyway. And used individually
by plains Indians to help carry, tote, pull, lug
when it was time to move, but again only relatively
light loads. Besides the lodgepoles that needed to
be moved anyway made a great travois. So why bother
with wheels.
VtSkier
There are apparently pre columbian toys with wheels
from Peru. Best guess is that wheels didn't work very
well in the Andes, that there weren't suitable draft
animal and wheels just didn't develop further from lack
of interest.
Alan Crozier
The picture was of a toy from Mexico.
I_E_Johansson
"VtSkier" <VtS...@nospam.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:3s4ic2F...@individual.net...
THAT was my first thought,
but then came the next:
Why would a child or grown up want to have a toy with an animal on wheel if
not to drag it by a rope or pull it closer with a rope on the toy?
Would it be likely that such a toy was made if there hadn't been a usage of
wheel(-s) one way or an other?
Might it be possible that wheels were used but due to being made by wood
they mouldered away? Or is it just that no one found a datable Pre-Viking
Age wheel anywhere up to now?
Inger E
Philip Deitiker
>> I thought it said America, last time I checked america
extended
>> from argentina to alaska.
>
> The picture was of a toy from Mexico.
What picture?
Philip Deitiker
news:3s4h83F...@individual.net:
> Have you ever seen llamas being used to draw
> a wagon?
No.
http://www.kingbilli.com.au/photos/drive3.jpg
Never
http://www.llamalove.com/cartllama.jpg
Why would you ask?
http://www.rrcnet.org/~llama/lam1.gif
It is my informed opinion that llamas cannot draw, given there
is not place for them to hold a crayon or brush (at least not
from an end they can see from), and if they were to draw they
would probably draw other llamas, like ole mama llama or phi
slama llama.
Philip Deitiker
> There are apparently pre columbian toys with wheels
> from Peru. Best guess is that wheels didn't work very
> well in the Andes, that there weren't suitable draft
> animal and wheels just didn't develop further from lack
> of interest.
The first appears to be true, the second appears to be false.
The mayan calender is based on the circle, so it the comal.
VtSkier
Because it's not possible to prove a negative, I can't
answer your last question.
Bodies are preserved VERY well in the dry cold air of
the Andes. It's not very reasonable to assume that wood
a couple of thousand years old wouldn't fare as well.
One of the ways we know about Old World culture is from
grave objects. Lots of graves, all across Eurasia, include
actual wheeled objects or miniature representations of
them. Wheels were IMPORTANT to Old Worlders, or else they
wouldn't have been included in grave objects.
AFAIK, there are no wheeled objects in graves in the
new world unless some of those toys were found in
graves. Wheels weren't IMPORTANT to new worlders, even
if they were known. Probably for a lot of reasons, some
of which I touched on in other posts.
VtSkier
The picture in the link that was provided in the
post that started this thread.
Tedd Jacobs
"VtSkier" wrote...
that last is pretty close to the main arguement for the lack of
developement; there was never a need for the wheel as a tool. a lack of
draft animals is an aside and topography(environment) is a conditioner.
Philip Deitiker
news:3s4i97F...@individual.net:
>> I thought it said America, last time I checked america
extended
>> from argentina to alaska.
>
> Philip, read a little closer.
I am reading as close as I want to.
> The wheeled toy was
> from Mexico. There are no llamas in Mexico
http://www.mexico-adventure.com/llamas.jpg
http://www.mexconnect.com/mex_/travel/hduckman/images/circus3.
jpg
http://www-anw.cs.umass.edu/~ajonsson/mexico/alegre/aad-
004.0.jpeg
> (at least
> they are not natural there and they are not
> portrayed in art there and no bones have been
> found AFAIK).
What is natural BTW about a Draught animal or a llama
domesticant?
The Mayan and Aztec empires were of recent developement,
critically the central empire could rely on forced labor or
laborers from the outlying regions, the aztec leaders used
runners to carry precious goods from the coast to the interior
(last time I checked humans were animals), probably because of
speed and durability relative to animals. When you are
overpopulated, pretty much like the central valley of mexico,
work animals are a luxury, in the older peripheraly regions
like Oaxaca they probably did have carts that were pulled by
humans. Possible some llamas were brought, but failed to
survive, that is hard to say. Take a look at aztec art and
metal work, there is an extensive use of wheel shapes and
circles.
> However, as I pointed out in another post, wheeled
> toys have apparently been found in South America.
> Then I went on to discuss the unsuitability of llamas
> as draft animals.
Yes and I clearly demostrated to you how wrong you were.
Llamas climb inclines of great than 45°, they are suitable for
pulling carts, they also have the temperment to be a draught
animals, however, because they don't have a wide footprint
they are not very good for 'trucking' loads, as a horse would
be. The other problem is that the andes were not amicable for
wheeled traffic. Alpaca and llama are used to carry loads,
however.
> Draft animals are used for pulling something, not carrying
> something.
Guacalotes!
I_E_Johansson
While your lines and thoughts seems to make sense,
I for one would like to hold the question about importance open. What's
haven't been found might be found some day and probably in an area close to
where such toys been made.
When reading your, and others, thoughts about animals to drag wagons and
such, I can't help remembering all the notes and thoughts written by
Historians meeting the Ostrogoths who placed people, preferly high-up
people, from the villages they called on for tribute each year travelling
southward towards the Black Sea region. No payment and the leading groups in
the villages were taken as slaves to row the Goths boats and drag their
wagons....
Inger E
Philip Deitiker
news:3s4lnlF...@individual.net:
> Philip Deitiker wrote:
>>>The picture was of a toy from Mexico.
>>
>>
>> What picture?
>
> The picture in the link that was provided in the
> post that started this thread.
OK, I see, Inger is in my killfile.
Alaca
Alaca
> VtSkier created a message ID
>>>> The picture was of a toy from Mexico.
>>> What picture?
>> The picture in the link that was provided in the
>> post that started this thread.
> OK, I see, Inger is in my killfile.
But Alan isn't.
See the second post in this thread, where
the link is not yet snipped by yourself.
--
P.A.
Philip Deitiker
news:435d2e7a$0$50527$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl by "Alaca"
<P.A...@18105.nn> . . . :
That's the spirit. Let's TAKE this all serious and stuff.
How about was the wheel known before or after the 'Vinland' period?
Alaca
> While your lines and thoughts seems to make sense,
> I for one would like to hold the question about importance open.
> What's haven't been found might be found some day and probably in an
> area close to where such toys been made.
>
> When reading your, and others, thoughts about animals to drag wagons
> and such, I can't help remembering all the notes and thoughts written
> by Historians meeting the Ostrogoths who placed people, preferly
> high-up people, from the villages they called on for tribute each
> year travelling southward towards the Black Sea region. No payment
> and the leading groups in the villages were taken as slaves to row
> the Goths boats and drag their wagons....
>
> Inger E
Goths and Black Sea? I thought this tread was
about horses and wheels in prehistoric America.
--
º°º°º°º < Peter Alaca > º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°
Philip Deitiker
news:435d2fe2$0$31476$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl by "Alaca"
<P.A...@18105.nn> . . . :
> Philip Deitiker wrote: Xns96F989...@128.249.2.19,
I see it now, it was buried under the headers.
No, I generally don't investigate crackpot sites either.
However, that's one of those Viking Chihuahua's. You know, the cold
tolerant dogs the viking took with them on their voyage, chosen
because hairlessness made the very useful for pulling viking ships on
shore. http://www.delange.org/Jalapa2/Jalapa2.htm
Here are some viking Jaguars and Ocelots on wheels.
The wheel is nothing special, if you are making pottery circles just
insert a hole and you have a wheel.
Alaca
> "Alaca" wrote:
>> Philip Deitiker wrote:
>>> Alan Crozier wrote:
>>>> I think the problem was not that they didn't have the wheel in
>>>> America, but that they did not have draught animals.
>>> llamas
>> http://tinyurl.com/79vlt ??
> That's the spirit. Let's TAKE this all serious and stuff.
> How about was the wheel known before or after the
> 'Vinland' period?
Don't mention that name here. But in fact I wondered
when the wheel was introduced (or used) for transport
in North America.
And I wondered why the OP is talking about pre-viking,
and not pre-Columbus, or pre-Henry Ford.
Alaca
> "Alaca" . . . :
>> Philip Deitiker wrote:
>>> VtSkier created a message ID
>>>> Philip Deitiker wrote:
>>>>>> The picture was of a toy from Mexico.
>>
>>>>> What picture?
>>>> The picture in the link that was provided in the
>>>> post that started this thread.
>>> OK, I see, Inger is in my killfile.
>> But Alan isn't.
>> See the second post in this thread, where
>> the link is not yet snipped by yourself.
>
> I see it now, it was buried under the headers.
> No, I generally don't investigate crackpot sites either.
> However, that's one of those Viking Chihuahua's. You know, the cold
> tolerant dogs the viking took with them on their voyage, chosen
> because hairlessness made the very useful for pulling viking ships on
> shore. http://www.delange.org/Jalapa2/Jalapa2.htm
> Here are some viking Jaguars and Ocelots on wheels.
Very pretty kitty-cats and I love the swinging children.
What an artists!
> The wheel is nothing special, if you are making pottery circles just
> insert a hole and you have a wheel.
That's Mr Fat Bastard to you Sonny
Warning.....Attempted topic morph in progress.
Hey Inger, when are your articles being published? What journal was it
again that is doing the publishing?
VtSkier
Thank you for that, but to get back to the thread
momentarily, notice the usually padded strap going
about the chest. This is the way it was done with
horses until the invention of the horse collar which
transfers weight to the shoulders as opposed to the
chest and windpipe. It is still used with horses for
light loads, not unlike the little carts being
towed by those llamas. Still not good draft animals.
And yet another llama joke might be a kind of
sausage from Peru called Deli llama.
VtSkier
hmmm, circles = wheels, eh? maybe sooner or later, but
not necessarily. There were lots of circles in the old
world before there were wheels.
Philip Deitiker
news:435d408b$0$21895$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl by "Alaca"
<P.A...@24105.nn> . . . :
> Very pretty kitty-cats and I love the swinging children.
> What an artists!
What do you think all those Mooring holes were for? Swingsets!!!!!!!
[Note: 7 exclamation points]
VtSkier
> In sci.archaeology, VtSkier created a message ID
> news:3s4i97F...@individual.net:
>
>
>>>I thought it said America, last time I checked america
>
> extended
>
>>>from argentina to alaska.
>>
>>Philip, read a little closer.
>
>
> I am reading as close as I want to.
>
>
>>The wheeled toy was
>>from Mexico. There are no llamas in Mexico
>
>
> http://www.mexico-adventure.com/llamas.jpg
> http://www.mexconnect.com/mex_/travel/hduckman/images/circus3.
> jpg
> http://www-anw.cs.umass.edu/~ajonsson/mexico/alegre/aad-
> 004.0.jpeg
>
>
>>(at least
>>they are not natural there and they are not
>>portrayed in art there and no bones have been
>>found AFAIK).
>
> What is natural BTW about a Draught animal or a llama
> domesticant?
Uhm, sometimes you seem to read something too fast.
Llamas do not occur naturally north of the Isthmus
of Panama.
As you say, they may have been imported, but there
is no evidence for it.
> The Mayan and Aztec empires were of recent developement,
> critically the central empire could rely on forced labor or
> laborers from the outlying regions, the aztec leaders used
> runners to carry precious goods from the coast to the interior
> (last time I checked humans were animals), probably because of
> speed and durability relative to animals. When you are
> overpopulated, pretty much like the central valley of mexico,
> work animals are a luxury, in the older peripheraly regions
> like Oaxaca they probably did have carts that were pulled by
> humans. Possible some llamas were brought, but failed to
> survive, that is hard to say. Take a look at aztec art and
> metal work, there is an extensive use of wheel shapes and
> circles.
As I pointed out, there were lots of circle shapes in
art in the old world before there were wheels. I
believe you can find the shape in some form for at
least 20,000 years back, Lasceaux for example, though
most of the pictures are of animals, none of them
are pulling a wagon.
Yes, in overpopulated areas like the Valley of Mexico,
human labor would have preferred over other forms of
"horsepower". Egypt is another example of that. We are
just beginning to learn how overpopulated some of the
New World areas were.
As for wheels for transport of those whose feet must
not touch the ground, a sedan chair is a far cooler
transport than a horse (llama) and buggy.
>>However, as I pointed out in another post, wheeled
>>toys have apparently been found in South America.
>>Then I went on to discuss the unsuitability of llamas
>>as draft animals.
>
> Yes and I clearly demostrated to you how wrong you were.
> Llamas climb inclines of great than 45°, they are suitable for
> pulling carts, they also have the temperment to be a draught
> animals, however, because they don't have a wide footprint
> they are not very good for 'trucking' loads, as a horse would
> be. The other problem is that the andes were not amicable for
> wheeled traffic. Alpaca and llama are used to carry loads,
> however.
I think that I have demonstrated that llamas are not
particularly good draft animals. Neat pulling a cart though.
I don't think I'd like to be in a cart being pulled up a
45 degree angle. I might, however go up that same incline
with a llama carrying a pack and if it were obliging,
have it assist me up the hill. It's really hard to walk
up 45°, for a human, that is.
Oh, and for really heavy loads even horses aren't the best,
oxen are. I'm not sure why large teams of mules were used
over horses, probably for temperament reasons.
Philip Deitiker
news:435d367d$0$14416$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl by "Alaca"
<P.A...@24105.nn> . . . :
> I_E_Johansson wrote: Fq97f.148998$dP1.5...@newsc.telia.net,
There's the _other_ route you know, across the northern ice cap and
then down canada to veracruz. I forgot to mention the other American
draught animal, the reindeer, also known as the caribou. Know what
the difference between caribou and reindeer is?
Caribou can't fly.
VtSkier
Hostage taking is an old an honored tradition as insurance
that deals will be kept. I believe the Romans practiced it
and I wouldn't be at all surprised to hear that the Greeks
did so too.
VtSkier
I forgot about that. However, I left her post
quoted in my response, so the link should have
been there.
Philip Deitiker
VtSkier <VtS...@nospam.net> . . . :
> Philip Deitiker wrote:
>> In sci.archaeology, VtSkier created a message ID
>> news:3s4h83F...@individual.net:
>>
>>
>>>Have you ever seen llamas being used to draw
>>>a wagon?
>>
>>
>> No.
>>
>> http://www.kingbilli.com.au/photos/drive3.jpg
>>
>> Never
>>
>> http://www.llamalove.com/cartllama.jpg
>>
>> Why would you ask?
>>
>> http://www.rrcnet.org/~llama/lam1.gif
>>
>> It is my informed opinion that llamas cannot draw, given there
>> is not place for them to hold a crayon or brush (at least not
>> from an end they can see from), and if they were to draw they
>> would probably draw other llamas, like ole mama llama or phi
>> slama llama.
>
> Thank you for that, but to get back to the thread
> momentarily
Thread I thought we were talking about drawing.
But then again weren't we talking about Vikings making wheelies
> notice the usually padded strap going
> about the chest. This is the way it was done with
> horses until the invention of the horse collar which
> transfers weight to the shoulders as opposed to the
> chest and windpipe. It is still used with horses for
> light loads, not unlike the little carts being
> towed by those llamas. Still not good draft animals.
>
> And yet another llama joke might be a kind of
> sausage from Peru called Deli llama.
It must have come from the wanted O sausage been llama.
--
Philip
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
____Groups_____
Mol Anthro http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DNAanthro/
Pal Anthro http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Paleoanthro/
Arch. Aux http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sciarchauxilliary/
Gliadin Sci http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/GliadinScience/
____Sites_____
Mol. Evol. Hominids http://home.att.net/~DNAPaleoAnth/
Evol. of Xchrom. http://home.att.net/~DNAPaleoAnth/xlinked.htm
VtSkier
That's a wooden cow!!!
VtSkier
No, only about wheels in precolumbian America.
The Goths crept in of their own accord.
VtSkier
> In sci.archaeology message news:3s4vf5F...@individual.net by
> VtSkier <VtS...@nospam.net> . . . :
>
>
>>Philip Deitiker wrote:
>>
>>>In sci.archaeology, VtSkier created a message ID
>>>news:3s4h83F...@individual.net:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Have you ever seen llamas being used to draw
>>>>a wagon?
>>>
>>>
>>>No.
>>>
>>>http://www.kingbilli.com.au/photos/drive3.jpg
>>>
>>>Never
>>>
>>>http://www.llamalove.com/cartllama.jpg
>>>
>>>Why would you ask?
>>>
>>>http://www.rrcnet.org/~llama/lam1.gif
>>>
>>>It is my informed opinion that llamas cannot draw, given there
>>>is not place for them to hold a crayon or brush (at least not
>>>from an end they can see from), and if they were to draw they
>>>would probably draw other llamas, like ole mama llama or phi
>>>slama llama.
>>
>>Thank you for that, but to get back to the thread
>>momentarily
>
>
> Thread I thought we were talking about drawing.
> But then again weren't we talking about Vikings making wheelies
Nicely put, but are you sure that Goths are Vikings?
>>notice the usually padded strap going
>>about the chest. This is the way it was done with
>>horses until the invention of the horse collar which
>>transfers weight to the shoulders as opposed to the
>>chest and windpipe. It is still used with horses for
>>light loads, not unlike the little carts being
>>towed by those llamas. Still not good draft animals.
>>
>>And yet another llama joke might be a kind of
>>sausage from Peru called Deli llama.
>
> It must have come from the wanted O sausage been llama.
Sheesh, you're better at this than I would have guessed.
Philip Deitiker
VtSkier <VtS...@nospam.net> . . . :
> No, only about wheels in precolumbian America.
> The Goths crept in of their own accord.
The Accord, of course, is a 4 wheeler.
Philip Deitiker
> Philip Deitiker wrote:
>>>Thank you for that, but to get back to the thread
>>>momentarily
>>
>>
>> Thread I thought we were talking about drawing.
>> But then again weren't we talking about Vikings making wheelies
>
> Nicely put, but are you sure that Goths are Vikings?
The only vikings I _am_ aware of live and work in Minnesota 6 months
a year, occasionally 7 months, during their traditional ceremonies
they dress up in heavy plastic pads with ornately colored coverings
and metal helmets. The Goths of course live in big cities, where off-
culture cloths and hair styles and pierce their bodies in places that
should not be pierced. The first instance is named after a strange
fascination of the Minnesotans with the idea that they were there
before they got their, whereas in the second there is a strange
fascination with where they will be (i.e. dead, death) before they
get there. I certainly know alot more about Cowboys and Cowgirls than
Vikings or Goths.
On the very remote chance you intended to say 'Goths were Vikings',
I would answer, I am not a norsophile, couldn't really give a ____.
But in looking at the claims I would say you would be hard pressed to
discriminate a southwestern scandinavian claim from an irish/scottish
claim of Gothic origin. Secondarily the gothic movements came much
earlier than the viking expansions, in fact they appear to have come
about the time the celtic world was expanding, and thus could have
been displaced from denmark or northern germany. The decline in
celtic culture began somewhere around 1st century BC and _could_ have
been associated with some movement of scandinavians although I think
I would side against this on the grounds there is sufficient evidence
now of cultural and gene flow before the 4th century BC to central
highlands of europe to suggest expansions had already occurred well
before the Viking period began, and the source is probably west of
the major viking ports.
Alaca
No it isn't. It is a pre-viking Llama species
called Pullalongcalf.
--
P.A.
Alaca
> VtSkier. wrote :
>> Philip Deitiker wrote:
>>> VtSkier wrote
Here is how the Norse brought the
wheels and the draft animals to NA
http://tinyurl.com/97674
and here the bishop of Vinland
makes a wheely after delivering
a stone slab to Kensington
http://tinyurl.com/be4dn
Philip Deitiker
news:435d6717$0$68489$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl by "Alaca"
<P.A...@24105.nn> . . . :
> No it isn't. It is a pre-viking Llama species
> called Pullalongcalf.
Actually its the Tojan Horse, now we know where odysess got lost.
Alaca
> > "Alaca" wrote
>> No it isn't. It is a pre-viking Llama species
>> called Pullalongcalf.
> Actually its the Tojan Horse, now we know where odysess got lost.
You mean the Towan Horse.
--
P.A.
Eric Stevens
Tom McDonald
Alaca wrote:
<snip>
> Here is how the Norse brought the
> wheels and the draft animals to NA
> http://tinyurl.com/97674
That looks like the poor attempt Vikings would make at tailgating.
That's 'tailgating' as in food and fun in the parking lot before a
game, not the kind of 'tailgating' some of the Vikings did on their
ships in Minneapolis.
> and here the bishop of Vinland
> makes a wheely after delivering
> a stone slab to Kensington
> http://tinyurl.com/be4dn
I don't think that's the Bishop of Vinland. By his helmet, I'd say he's
the Bishop of Mid-New-Continent-Greater Finland, America.
If you look very carefully, you can see the tip of his cocoanut bowl.
Philip Deitiker
news:435d6808$0$72752$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl by "Alaca"
<P.A...@24105.nn> . . . :
> Philip Deitiker wrote:
>> VtSkier. wrote :
>>> Philip Deitiker wrote:
>>> And yet another llama joke might be a kind of
>>> sausage from Peru called Deli llama.
>
>> It must have come from the wanted O sausage been llama.
>
>
> Here is how the Norse brought the
> wheels and the draft animals to NA
> http://tinyurl.com/97674
Well that explains how they got from the Black sea to Port Lavaca.
Of course they still need to get to Vera Cruz.
> and here the bishop of Vinland
> makes a wheely after delivering
> a stone slab to Kensington
> http://tinyurl.com/be4dn
Its not a complete theory you know, its missing Nicholas of Lynn, or
at least some saintly variation. I say this, the vikings did not
invent the wheel, but the wheel invented the viking, prove me
wrong!!!!!!!
I_E_Johansson
due to new information I had and that I happened to be able to track
parts(fragments) of the origin Grennlandic Annal and a copybook of the text
on fragment as well as the rest which been in a very secure archieve since
1520's, due to that I have had to withdraw my origin article. Lots of new
facts which confirms loose ends in wellknown sources. I have added and
rewritten and the article will this time be published in HistorieForum's
Tidskrift för historisk debatt, if nothing else comes up it's planned to be
edited in December don't know when it's to be out for publishing. Early next
year but which month I forgot to ask. Why I publish there? Shortest time
between writing and per view to editing, is one reason. The other is that
there will be an article in it which links a Norwegian group with one of
those associated to the Goths. The author of that one and I have long
planned for writing a work about Migration Age.
An other work will be published together with one of my Ph.D friends. A
book. We written 12 full chapters and have the hard 'branch' for the rest.
When that will be published I can't say. We plan to deliver it during
Springtime early Summer.
Then there is a re-written version, added information, of my Gothic Mosaic
almost ready to be sent to per view. That might take a while because it's
filled with references to artifacts as well as to written Prime sources. The
version I had last time took 4 month for each of those who checked every
detail.....
Inger E
"That's Mr Fat Bastard to you Sonny" <John....@aph.gov.au> skrev i
meddelandet news:pan.2005.10.24...@aph.gov.au...
I_E_Johansson
OK let's say for a very theoretical thought that they were,
then comes the question from where?
Can't help it but when I saw the toy it reminded me of a dog on four wheels
I had in 1952.... Never thought that children or adults in such early days
had other toys than a wooden or a woven doll.....
Inger E
<snip the rest>
I_E_Johansson
Neither would I. So we agree 100% upon that one.
Is there any indications from artifacts or kipas that same practice was used
in the New World?
Inger E
I_E_Johansson
No as an example to be compared with the earlier assumption that an animal
was needed to drag wagon!
Inger E
Alaca
> In sci.archaeology message
>> Philip Deitiker wrote:
>>> VtSkier. wrote :
>>>> Philip Deitiker wrote:
>>>> And yet another llama joke might be a kind of
>>>> sausage from Peru called Deli llama.
>>> It must have come from the wanted O sausage been llama.
>> Here is how the Norse brought the
>> wheels and the draft animals to NA
>> http://tinyurl.com/97674
> Well that explains how they got from the Black sea to Port Lavaca.
> Of course they still need to get to Vera Cruz.
>> and here the bishop of Vinland
>> makes a wheely after delivering
>> a stone slab to Kensington
>> http://tinyurl.com/be4dn
> Its not a complete theory you know, its missing Nicholas of Lynn, or
> at least some saintly variation.
Tom is right. It's not the bishop of Vinland,
but I was (and am) too lazy to remember
the name of that KRS guy.
> I say this, the vikings did not invent the wheel,
> but the wheel invented the viking, prove me
> wrong!!!!!!!
--
º°º°º°º < Peter Alaca > º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°
Alaca
Your eyes are better then mine. Where do you see
his coconut? Is it silver mounted?
I wonder where the collected tithes are. In the tires?
It is clear that he uses butternut oil as fuel.
--
º°º°º°º < Peter Alaca > º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°
VtSkier
Inger, you misread me. I was echoing another poster who
suggested that llamas might have been imported from South
America into Mexico. I doubted it because AFAIK no
physical evidence has been found.
I have no particular doubt that wheels were known pre-
Columbus and pre-Leif in the new world. The just simply
weren't used for transport, or if they were they weren't
used enough to leave physical evidence.
VtSkier
If what the historians of the Valley of Mexico say is true,
and there is some evidence to back it up, taking of hostages
and prisoners of war was to feed the gods' immense appetite
for blood sacrifice. Or at least that's the story that has
come down to us. And this is told of the Aztecs and their
immediate predecessors but not necessarily of the Maya, who
apparently did have human sacrifice now and then, but not
on the scale of Teotihuacan.
There is much less bloody propaganda about the Inca and their
predecessors in South America. Mummies abound, but with little
evidence of sacrifice.
The Incas held a far-flung empire consisting of many tribes
(Inca is not the name of a tribe, it is the name of a
government, or a ruling family, or some such). They brought
in tribute from a very wide area. Hostage taking is such a good
way to insure that the flow continued that I would be surprised
if the rulers didn't think of it and use it.
I_E_Johansson
Not sure I misread you. What I was after is the category of toy. Of course I
know of the toy dated to 8000 BP found in Florida, but since I haven't heard
of alike toys, with or without wheels, from South America and areas close to
Mexico in North America, I was thinking of imported from where. I agree upon
your doubts, but if we are wrong question remains from where.
>
> I have no particular doubt that wheels were known pre-
> Columbus and pre-Leif in the new world. The just simply
> weren't used for transport, or if they were they weren't
> used enough to leave physical evidence.
At least no physical evidence found up to now.
Inger E
VtSkier
A thought to continue the discussion.
The areas of the world where we usually find wheel use early
on is generally flat to rolling with a good firm surface
of well developed sod and few trees.
The areas of the new world where "civilization" with its
technological advances developed tended to be mountainous.
In South America intensive agriculture (a sure sign of
civilization) developed extensive terraced fields up the
mountains for instance.
The valley of Mexico is mountainous. The pueblo areas of
the US Southwest are mountainous.
The area of North America analogous to Central Asia is
the Great Plains. The people here tended to be
migratory buffalo (bison) hunters. While to early white-
mans' eyes, they did nothing except follow the herds
and take what they needed, they did in fact, manage
their environment to a marked degree. For instance, they
used fire to extend the prairie and therefore the grazing
available to the herds.
While wheels might have been useful to these people, they
apparently simply never developed them.
I would suggest the Pampas of South America were analogous
to the Great Plains of NA in many ways.
Much of North America is wet and without a great deal of
preparation, wheels are a problem. Ask me about "Mud
Season" in New England sometime. James Michner in one of
his novels (I forget which one) recounts the movement
west of European Americans in the 1840's and 50's. It
seems that it was much harder to cross the Alleghenys
in Western Pennsylvania than it was to cross the
Rockies at South Pass. But of course the Sierras were
the worst of all with only one water gap through any of
the coast ranges for whole length of the continent
(the Snake/Columbia system).
Philip Deitiker
VtSkier <VtS...@nospam.net> . . . :
> Inger, you misread me. I was echoing another poster who
> suggested that llamas might have been imported from South
> America into Mexico. I doubted it because AFAIK no
> physical evidence has been found.
Tah, tah, tah, tah.
I suggested no such thing, some poster asked if there were druaght
capable animals in the Americas. I replied llamas. I never said they
were used in mexico, although they do 'live' in mexico
jaded
mountainous, we also find these sixty foot wide 'sacbees' or roads in
the Yucatan that are raised, smooth and straight for tens of miles. In
the Southwest there are also roads that extend for hundreds of miles.
These are dismissed as ceremonial causeways.
What we find is that the wheel was known throughout the Americas, that
there were undeveloped sources of pack animals, and a developed highway
infrastructure.
It follows that the lack of wheeled carts is the result of a political
or social prohibition.
Mobility was not a priority. In fact, just the opposite. The centering
of the world ceremonies, geomantic layouts, strong village and tribal
affiliations point to an emphasis on stability and stasis rather than
travel, regional interaction and mobility.
VtSkier
While you make some great points, I think your conclusion
statement may be old-school. Recent findings are pointing
to the facts that North and South America had much larger
populations than previously supposed and that trade was
being extensively carried on on continent-wide basis.
Another point for discussion. North and South America both
have a great many navigable rivers which will take you to
almost the "four corners" of each continent. If the rivers
were widely used, then wheeled vehicles would have been
discouraged because of the bother of carrying large items
on your boat, making a need for a bigger boat and a more
limited range. No matter what nifty ways you have to travel/
move things, over/on water is always the cheapest.
This observation of the New World is also basically true
of Eurasia. So why did wheels develop in Eurasia and not
in N/S America?
I_E_Johansson
Second most of the lines. Before telling quick thoughts of mine for the last
question, I can't help thinking about the long roads of Yucatan. Is it
possible that some of them could have seen wheel-transports one way or an
other but the belief that the wheel wasn't known when they were in use
caused missing to look for tracks?
Guess that the question why wheels developed into transportable wagons might
be due to a mix of reasons. One could be that while it was possible to
transport by sea and/or watersystems(rivers and lakes) over long distances
the need to transport cargo to the boat/ship etc and from there might have
lead to the invention of primitive wagons on a very early stage. One other
reason could be that in Egypt and many of the other 'early' countries there
were large areas where it was relatively flat on one hand and the
administration had to have a good control over distant settlements as well
as close ones. Why they simply didn't ride? No idea.
Inger E
VtSkier
Here is a thought. Yucatan is a jungle. Jungles have a
way of consuming most anything left laying around. Could
it be that wheeled vehicles WERE used in the area and the
jungle has covered their tracks, so to speak. However, if
this were so, why didn't wheel use become popular in areas
where nature doesn't take such a toll.
> Guess that the question why wheels developed into transportable wagons might
> be due to a mix of reasons. One could be that while it was possible to
> transport by sea and/or watersystems(rivers and lakes) over long distances
> the need to transport cargo to the boat/ship etc and from there might have
> lead to the invention of primitive wagons on a very early stage. One other
> reason could be that in Egypt and many of the other 'early' countries there
> were large areas where it was relatively flat on one hand and the
> administration had to have a good control over distant settlements as well
> as close ones. Why they simply didn't ride? No idea.
My observation is that wheels were used in Eurasia
(and Egypt) for moving goods and where it was required
to be "cool". Or where the wheeled vehicle itself was a
military weapon. Armies moved on foot with their supplies
moving by wagon. Parts of the army may have been mounted,
but mainly the horse was part of the weaponry.
A messenger driving a chariot, IMO would have been
more "cool" that a messenger riding a horse.
The Inca (and their predecessors) also built roads and
maintained communication within the empire by a system
of runners. No animals used at all. Llamas were pack
animals only and while they could draw light loads, it
appears that they weren't used for such.
nos...@spammers.of.the.world.unite.com
<VtS...@nospam.net> said:
>I have no particular doubt that wheels were known pre-
>Columbus and pre-Leif in the new world. The just simply
>weren't used for transport, or if they were they weren't
>used enough to leave physical evidence.
Wheels on toys serve a special purpose.
A real llama walks about and you can put a pack over it and lead it so that it
carries the pack for you.
A toy llama teaches the child how to lead a llama about, perhaps also with a
pack on the back of it, but unless you put wheels on the feet it will just
topple over.
So the wheels are necessary for the toy but have nothing to do with the real
thing.
Philip Deitiker
Warfare and chariots. Wheeled carts are a byproduct of the
chariot age and warfare conducted on horseback.
You did not ask the question first, whether there were
precedances for draught animals, if you had asked I would say
that in the Old world domestication was focused on animal
domesticants (Sheep, goat, donkey, dog, cat, horse, cow,
chicken, reindeer, dromedary, camel, elephants, etc) and in
the New world (Llama, turkey), whereas in the New World there
was a focus on what? Plant domesticants (Tomatoes, Potatoes,
COrn, beans (3), avocados, peppers, cactus, agave, vegetable
squashes, fruit, squashes, tomatillas, etc, etc, etc). Not
only this but domestication of animals in the old world
appears to have earlier and earlier precedances, in the middle
east or possibly africa, dating to almost the time the new
world was settled. To say that the new world did not have
druaght animals is wrong, as a matter of fact one can trace
sled dogs back to the dorsett culture, but this culture
clearly came from the east, not the west or indigeonous
populations (since Inger doesn't give a damn about eastern
influences we are lead into a silly conversation that has no
anthropological meaning).
http://www.imh.org/imh/bw/donkey.html Pack animal.
http://www.bridgestone.co.jp/hgt/hgtE/hajimari/hajimariE2a.htm
l
Oxen attribute domestication to before 7000 years ago, and
even in western europe 5000 years ago, with a dairy industry
present in the Bronze age of the Ilses. There can be no
question that animal domesticants were more developed in asia,
the opportunities for domestication can be attributed to large
numbers of people spread over vast areas and not particularly
a cultural skill. For instance bovids are tracable to india,
the donkey was domesticated in africa, the horse in north
central asia, the chicken in india, the pig in many places
(ryukyu, china, . . . ) the dog in central asia, cat in africa
or asia, carp in china, sheeps and goats probably many places.
These domesitication events are the probable long term
association of luck, long term association of humans with
certain prey, and the curious observation of other
domesticants.
With the domestication of horses and oxen. In the steppes
feilds are plowed and large concentration of single grains are
planted. In south america, forests are cleared and varities of
crops are planted. At the expense of good health, these single
grains are plowed in strait rows and draught animals can be
used. In the steppes also traveling over great distances
households need to be transported, people cannot eat grass but
pack animals can. As a result camels, horses, etc become
popular. Off the steppes come horseborn invaders and ergo
chariots which evolve into coaches, etc. Oxen based carts are
slow but they carry a large weight, ass of donkeys can pack
heavy weights.
In the Americas, my bets are on the first arrivers by boats,
sufficiently large enough to hold families, there is the
potential that the ryukyuan pig could have been brought, but
my beleif is the first travelers came from what is now the
islands of kyushu and shikoku and there is no evidence they
had domesticated animals. These people dominate south americas
lowlands but contribute to the highland population and are the
probable source of the first new wold domesticants, squash.
This people was followed by a wave of immigration from central
asia, open range hunters, possibly with dogs although dogs
easily could have come later. The early phase of mega fauna
declines transforms they way people lived and so I would
predict that competition for scarcer resources as a result of
interhuman competition really kicks in about 6000 years ago.
By this time events in south america do favor the first
nascent animal domestication and followed in central america
by the second animal domestication event. Up until that time
the focus of new world activities was on plant husbandry.
Where does cotton come from and what does it replace?
In this regard the new world lagged the old world by 3 or
4,000 years. However comparing densely population old world
areas like India or china we can see that plant domestication
and husbandry was at least at par or better in the New World.
Even without animal domesticants. Native americans were
growing crops in nutrient poor jungles as well as waterless
highlands. This could reflect the habits of the first settlers
from the largely pescavoric hunter gatherers of eastern
kyushu/shikoku region of the paleolithic. In addition the arid
regions of the new world were/are extremely susceptible to
overgrazing particularly from ovids. One advantage of
specifically cows is they pull the extremeties of the grasses
off the clump versus nibbling the clump at the base as ovids
do. This destroys grasslands relatively quickly, and it also
destroys the livelihood of other grassland herbivores, such as
deer and buffulo. Where as the buffulo move radidly over
grazing lands, travel long distances and pack the soil but
preserve the plants as they go. This had lead to the building
of topsoils over the plains maximizing wild productions of
meat. Unfortunately, in the time, given buffulo were
unsuitable for domestication.
In mexico there simply was not that much meat from
megafauna available to support the population, the focus was
almost entirely on domesticants and minute/aquatic fauna.
Addition of domesticants would come at the cost of lower
production. We can see now for instance in northern mexico, a
relatively less dense population has already exceeded water
quotas and dried the Rio Grande dry toward the coast. This is
because northern mexico is not suitable for the types of
agriculture that europeans have grown accustommed. Typical
plants like Agave, Cactus, Corn were suitable all had dryland
farming adaptations. Elevated lands with excessive sunlight do
not work well for plants that transpire lots of water to stay
cool.
One person was right in arguing that there are extensive
lowlands suitable for roads in eastern mexico, where the
wheeled carts are found, but those carts would have been
pulled by humans and not animals. Used primarily for certain
dedicated tasks. Also along the eastern coast are large areas
suitable for grazing animals, and the American bison did range
as far south as these areas. But these areas were not suitable
for the domesticants of the time, the llamas, that lived on
the cool elevated highlands of equitorial south america. The
coastal plains of north eastern mexico are hot, humid, with
temperatures in the summer that range from 90's to 110's and
humidities that range from 60% to 90% give trouble to animals
like horses let alone the llama. In northerm mexico the
domesticants of choice are the donkey (africa) and goat
(middle eastern and african), the donkey is a pack animal.
Toward the cooler regions of the south where rainfalls are
higher cattle and pigs dominate. This is not to say that
eastern mexico was unsuited for horses, during the early anglo
period of texas horses roamed in great numbers from mexico to
canada. However the differences between a wild horse is that
it can choose when and where it deals with heat and humidity,
and a domesticated horse is at the mercy of its owner.
In this light one has to consider the appropriate draught
animal for the region would be the oxen, oxen were not
domesticated everywhere, they were domesticated in india and
transported elsewhere, for example africa, 1000s of years ago,
people who had oxen then migrated into europe and from india
into china and asia, IOW one chance event where technology
spread radial from its invention. We can compare this with
say, chocolate, chocolate was not domesticated many places, it
was domesticated in one place and spread many places. There is
no comparable species that can be domesticated. We can compare
chocolate with the azuki bean, lentil, maya bean, butter
beans, peas, etc. Essentially the same food which can be
selected for essentially the same qualities in rather short
order and was domesticated in many places. Another example is
Corn, there is nothing similar to corn in the old world, it is
unique and all corn comes from mesoamerica, basically. We can
contrast that with wheat, wheat, oats, barley, rye come from
many places. The family of wheat are essentially goatgrasses
(the wheat genome was born out of a (wheat x goatgrass) x
goatgrass combination which part of one genome was swapped out
by another). These grains can pretty much perform the same
function with a little selective cultivation. Rices exist in
several places throughout the world dominated by an indian
domesticant, but with other genera offering up the same
cultivation qualities and grains more or less similar. Grapes
are another example as we have discussed.
So we have to say that domesticants fall into two
varieties. One variety of domesticants fall into the catagory
of near ubiquity in origin fulfilling a common niche in nature
spread over a vast area. The other variety of domesticants
fulfilled a specific niche in one area that was later adapted
to human use. The Oxen fall specifically into the second
catagory, very few world bovids are suitable to fulfill the
role of the oxen, and thus the ox-cart is something that needs
to flow from one place to the other. Horse, donkey, llama,
sled dog like animals can be drafted for use and while the
horse appears to take advantage because of its size, strength
of its hind legs and hoof shape, these animals were initially
used as pack animals, like the donkey and camel. So we see the
parallel between domestication-dog, horse and transportation-
sled, chariot, are things that can evolve over large areas
with different species over time.
If one wants to talk about the strongest bovid we could talk
about why the Cape Buffulo was not domesticated? Imagine what
a cape buffulo could carry! but imagine what would happen to
the owner if he crossed the cape buffulo. In india the cow is
transformed not to a meat animal, but a milk animal, which
means that the milk animal gets the benefit of human
protection while being allowed to mature and produce offspring
(you can't get milk without offspring production). This
relationship gets cows into the situation which they can be
later exploited for a variety of reasons. Cows are bred as
Draught animals, Meat animals, Milk animals, Leather animals.
VtSkier
True enough and maybe the end of it.
But...
Wheels to make it possible to lead a toy llama,
especially if you put a pack on it should lead to
the observation/conclusion that it might be
useful to have a wheeled vehicle to help "lighten
your load".
Apparently wheeled toys have been found from
the Andes, to the Valley of Mexico to Florida and
maybe other places I'm not aware of.
If you find a wheeled toy in one area and the
wheels don't get used for useful worked, then
maybe you can write it off as a taboo against
using wheels for that society. But would all
of the societies having wheeled toys have a
taboo against using wheels for useful work?
VtSkier
> In sci.archaeology, VtSkier created a message ID
> news:435E42A5...@nospam.net:
>>Another point for discussion. North and South America both
>>have a great many navigable rivers which will take you to
>>almost the "four corners" of each continent. If the rivers
>>were widely used, then wheeled vehicles would have been
>>discouraged because of the bother of carrying large items
>>on your boat, making a need for a bigger boat and a more
>>limited range. No matter what nifty ways you have to travel/
>>move things, over/on water is always the cheapest.
>>
>>This observation of the New World is also basically true
>>of Eurasia. So why did wheels develop in Eurasia and not
>>in N/S America?
>
> Warfare and chariots. Wheeled carts are a byproduct of the
> chariot age and warfare conducted on horseback.
A lot of really good stuff here which I have saved for
later scrutiny. But actually I think there has been a
lot of discussion around the fact that there is a scarcity
of animals suitable for pulling wagons, thereby promoting
the development of wheels in the New World.
(snip the long list of domesticants)
> If one wants to talk about the strongest bovid we could talk
> about why the Cape Buffulo was not domesticated? Imagine what
> a cape buffulo could carry! but imagine what would happen to
> the owner if he crossed the cape buffulo. In india the cow is
> transformed not to a meat animal, but a milk animal, which
> means that the milk animal gets the benefit of human
> protection while being allowed to mature and produce offspring
> (you can't get milk without offspring production). This
> relationship gets cows into the situation which they can be
> later exploited for a variety of reasons. Cows are bred as
> Draught animals, Meat animals, Milk animals, Leather animals.
A couple of additional points in discussion of Bovids.
The cow of India is not the same species of the cow
of Europe. The Indian cow is descended from the Zebu,
characterized by a hump on it's shoulders. The
European cow is descended from the Aurochs. Now, if you
want to talk about power...
I think a full grown aurochs might just be able to
out pull a Cape Buffalo.
I might also point out that oxen are always neutered
male bovids (by definition). Why wouldn't a Cape Buffalo
be tractable when neutered. God know I wouldn't want to
get very close to a fully complete Guernsey bull. Though a
Scottish Highland bull is a relatively friendly beast
and not a particular danger in a pasture.
I might also add to the discussion by pointing out that
the most popular domesticated animal in the world is
the goat. Meat, milk, leather all in an animal which
is a MUCH less fussy eater than a cow, comes in a smaller
package and can be gotten to pull a cart from time to time.
Much easier to raise than cows, especially on marginal land.
Eric Stevens
wrote:
Philip has already covered at great lengths my thoughts about the
relative availability of tractive animals. Europe had horses for speed
and oxen for heavy loads. The americas had neither.
There is another aspect. Why go to all the troubles entailed in
wagons, horses-oxen and the construction of roads if you have plenty
of slaves to carry the burden? The difference in the cultures of
Europe and the americas may have made a difference.
However, while there might be a number of factors which make the use
of wheels in the americas less likely than in Europe, why is there NO
evidence of the use of wheels in the americas except for toys. Why was
the use of wheels not merely discouraged but apparently prohibited?
Eric Stevens
Philip Deitiker
The indian Zebu and european cow are the same species.
We use a Zebu/Cow cross in Texas known and the Bramah. The bramah/cow
crosses have excellent durability against coyotes and other pest
species, males are agressive but make good herd bosses.
> I think a full grown aurochs might just be able to
> out pull a Cape Buffalo.
>
> I might also point out that oxen are always neutered
> male bovids (by definition). Why wouldn't a Cape Buffalo
> be tractable when neutered. God know I wouldn't want to
> get very close to a fully complete Guernsey bull. Though a
> Scottish Highland bull is a relatively friendly beast
> and not a particular danger in a pasture.
Unless you are another bull.
> I might also add to the discussion by pointing out that
> the most popular domesticated animal in the world is
> the goat. Meat, milk, leather all in an animal which
> is a MUCH less fussy eater than a cow, comes in a smaller
> package and can be gotten to pull a cart from time to time.
Yes and goats destroy the land. When one talks about desertification
and rainfall abation in africa, all one needs to look at is goat
densities on semi-arid arid boundaries. In Scotland and Ireland
sheeps and goats are well suited because grass grows relatively fast
and water loss is not that much of a problem.
> Much easier to raise than cows, especially on marginal land.
Goats are not easier than cows, goats are, literally, a pain in the
ass to raise. I raised a sheep for competition, I almost doubled my
leg mass over the course of 8 months. One sheep over about an acre
makes mowing the grass alot easier, but also they need food, water,
vitamins, their horns have to be pulled, they get infected, the males
need to be nuetered, etc. Sheep also need to be exercised, hurdles,
they are social animals and they need companionship, cows do not. My
sheep bonded with a female Irish Setter, ate when she ate, ate what
she ate, followed her everywhere, slept with her, etc.
A cow needs a pasture, occasionally some alfapha, and wormed. If
you put weight on fast enough you can cull the males before the
mature and keep the heffers. One forgets that during the 1750s to
1850s the longhorn cattle, where not a breed of cattle, they were
ferrel cattle that developed after large numbers of spanish cattle
escaped and migrated north, interbred with each other and became
wild. While wild cattle are not as 'prime' as domesticated cattle,
there was little chance of having an obesity problem eating the meat
from a longhorn, as the meat was largely muscle and very little fat.
The longhorn cow has no natural enemies in texas, there is no coyote
capable of killing a longhorn, cougers aren't big enough, they can
get the calf, watchout for the mothers horns. The only natural enemy
of the longhorn was the indigeonous people, and thus the bred like
rabbits. With sheep and goats, coyotes have to be controlled or
prevented, without some intervention they develope a taste for goats.
In northern Mexico I watched the farmers across the rio grande
escorting his herd through the pastures, grazing them and then moving
on. Typically they carry a .22 cal rifle, the goats know who is their
livelihood.
Here is the cow, the texas cow. They feed like a combine, walking
while they eat, cows released on a pasture graze across the pasture
literally while they are walking. You can honk the horn of your truck
and they will leave the pasture and you through them a few blocks out
which they snarf up, we are talking 50 tons of beef, no need for
dogs. YOu close the gate, and they follow the truck back to the pen
or the next pasture. Even the finicky breeds you can get 95%
fertilization in a year. They bear the calves, raise the calves. You
don't have to sheer them, dehorn them, etc. Cow dung is a good soil
preparer, sheep dung is not, it makes the soil hard. When a herd
cleans a pasture at the end of the season its manure is ready to be
tilled into the soil. The pasture is ready for the next season, a
little Nitrogen and it is off. Cow herds have their own order, there
is usually a lead female and often a bull. The order of female
dominance is usually based on age, and the old females are wise as
any dog, they know where to go, what to do next, the pretty much know
why they are being moved and will wait at pasture gates when its time
to move to new pastures. Sheep I have to say are pretty stupid, ok,
really stupid, every month I had to go round up sheep, except my own
which was as easy as calling my dog into the truck, stupid sheep
followed her, the other sheep needed to be rounded up. Pain in the
butt, they would not even follow their owner, you compare that with a
steer, some of those steers weighed almost a ton, their master maybe
90 lbs, following her around like a pet.
--
Philip
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
____Groups_____
Mol Anthro http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DNAanthro/
Pal Anthro http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Paleoanthro/
Arch. Aux http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sciarchauxilliary/
Gliadin Sci http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/GliadinScience/
____Sites_____
Mol. Evol. Hominids http://home.att.net/~DNAPaleoAnth/
Evol. of Xchrom. http://home.att.net/~DNAPaleoAnth/xlinked.htm
Paul J Gans
>"I_E_Johansson" <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote in message
>news:x157f.148972$dP1.5...@newsc.telia.net...
>> Had some ref sent to me the other day. Among them an url to
>> http://www.cristobalcolondeibiza.com/2eng/2eng12.htm#pto10
>>
>> where it say:
>> "The wheel was indeed known in America. On the left, pottery toy with
>wheels
>> 49?E, 45km NW of Rawalpindi. On the right, dog or deer with painted muzzle
>> and eyes. In Veracruz, Mexico (ca. 500 AD)."
>>
>> Not knowing much about the site in Veracruz I can't help wondering, can
>this
>> be true? I doubt that the tool to the right could show anything but
>wheels,
>> but hasn't it been argued that there were no wheels in Ancient America
>> before people from the Old World, Vikings or later explorers and migrators
>> introduced the wheel. What's your thoughts? Is other alike artifacts known
>> from Mexico or elsewhere?
>I think the problem was not that they didn't have the wheel in America, but
>that they did not have draught animals.
Exactly. Jared Diamond has written a book on the intersection
of geography, climate, and human civilization.
---- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
>In sci.archaeology, Alan Crozier created a message ID
>news:yp57f.36634$d5.1...@newsb.telia.net:
>> I think the problem was not that they didn't have the wheel in
>America, but
>> that they did not have draught animals.
>llamas
Not really suitable and limited in range. See
Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs, and Steel" (have I
got that title right?)
---- Paul J. Gans
deowll
"VtSkier" <VtS...@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:3s4h83F...@individual.net...
> Philip Deitiker wrote:
>> In sci.archaeology, Alan Crozier created a message ID
>> news:yp57f.36634$d5.1...@newsb.telia.net:
>>
>>
>>>I think the problem was not that they didn't have the wheel in
>>
>> America, but
>>
>>>that they did not have draught animals.
>>
>>
>> llamas
>
> a wagon?
Dogs were once commonly used to pull wagons. Check out the working class.
deowll
> Uwe Müller wrote:
>> "Alan Crozier" <name1...@telia.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>> news:yp57f.36634$d5.1...@newsb.telia.net...
>>
>>>"I_E_Johansson" <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote in message
>>>news:x157f.148972$dP1.5...@newsc.telia.net...
>>>
>>>>Had some ref sent to me the other day. Among them an url to
>>>> http://www.cristobalcolondeibiza.com/2eng/2eng12.htm#pto10
>>>>
>>>>where it say:
>>>>"The wheel was indeed known in America. On the left, pottery toy with
>>>
>>>wheels
>>>
>>
>> 72º
>>
>>
>> muzzle
>>
>>>>and eyes. In Veracruz, Mexico (ca. 500 AD)."
>>>>
>>>>Not knowing much about the site in Veracruz I can't help wondering, can
>>>
>>>this
>>>
>>>>be true? I doubt that the tool to the right could show anything but
>>>
>>>wheels,
>>>
>>>>but hasn't it been argued that there were no wheels in Ancient America
>>>>before people from the Old World, Vikings or later explorers and
>>
>> migrators
>>
>>>>introduced the wheel. What's your thoughts? Is other alike artifacts
>>
>> known
>>
>>>>from Mexico or elsewhere?
>>>
>>
>> but
>>
>>>that they did not have draught animals.
>>>
>>
>>
>> were
>> found), but it was not used for transportation as they lacked suitable
>> roads. Wheeled transportation is best developed in flat areas and with
>> developed socieries, that have need of mass transportation. Having the
>> Andean mountains in the way can show technological difficulties in even
>> the
>> best design.
>>
>> have fun
>>
>> Uwe Mueller
>
> Certainly there were developed societies in both south th
> and central America. There were tracts of flat area where
> wheels might have been useful. I think lack of suitable
> draft animals is the best answer. Someone suggested
> llamas. A fairly small, light animal with an erect neck/
> head. I can see problems with a proper harness that doesn't
> choke the beast. Remember that horses were use mainly for
> light work until the development of the horse collar
> which transferred loads to shoulders. Oxen were the
> bulldozers of transport for thousands of years. Even if
> a respectable harness could have been developed for llamas,
> the problem of weight (horsepower) still exists.
They could have been bred larger. This happened with the horse and camal. I
suppose the lama is larger to some degree. One breed of donkey is the size
of a horse and no I don't mean mule.
Philip Deitiker
news:XFA7f.11302$ty1....@bignews1.bellsouth.net by "deowll"
<deo...@bellsouth.net> . . . :
My dog used to pull my bicycle about the neighborhood, what you would
call a lazy mans dog walk. She loves it, dogs love to pull stuff.
Problem is of course controlling the direction of pull. She can
produce a pretty hefty amount of pull for a 25 lb dog. Dogs
unfortunately eat meat, and oxen eat grass. In the artic there is
alot of meat relative to grass and so if the dogs get you to the meat
faster, they pay for their keep. After, how much meat can a human
eat? [Apparently in the artic they can eat alot, at least if the meat
is fish].
Philip Deitiker
Paul J Gans <ga...@panix.com> . . . :
Llamas would be suitable as draught animals in the high plains,
provided good roads. I don't see why not. They would be suitable in
the arctic, although caribou would be more suited. They would be
suitable in the mountains of northern high plains of mexico, their
wool is highly prized also.
Philip Deitiker
Paul J Gans <ga...@panix.com> . . . :
> In sci.archaeology Alan Crozier <name1...@telia.com> wrote:
Apparently an overrelied on book, also.
Tom McDonald
It's far easier for a dog to pull a travois than a wheeled cart.
For one thing, it's simple, light and easily made (and
abandoned). For another thing, it can be made to the size of the
dog.
And, of course, why would folks who had a technology that worked
fine for them in nearly all terrains develop an inferior
technology that was only useful on level ground? And took more
resources, was harder to make and was not adjustable for the
sized of the dog pulling it?
But if Inger wants to find wheels from India in the remains of
Teotihuacan, she can peer into the past using us as her research
gnomes.
Philip Deitiker
news:6IA7f.11332$ty1....@bignews1.bellsouth.net by "deowll"
<deo...@bellsouth.net> . . . :
>
> "VtSkier" <VtS...@nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:3s4hinF...@individual.net...
>> Uwe Müller wrote:
>>> "Alan Crozier" <name1...@telia.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>>> news:yp57f.36634$d5.1...@newsb.telia.net...
>>>
>>>>"I_E_Johansson" <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:x157f.148972$dP1.5...@newsc.telia.net...
>>>>
>>>>>Had some ref sent to me the other day. Among them an url to
>>>>> http://www.cristobalcolondeibiza.com/2eng/2eng12.htm#pto10
>>>>>
>>>>>where it say:
>>>>>"The wheel was indeed known in America. On the left, pottery
>>>>>toy with
>>>>
>>>>wheels
>>>>
>>>>>in Taxila (India), second century BC. Taxila is situated 33ş
>>>>>44´N and
>>>
>>> 72ş
They have lots of wool that grows relatively long, which could be
braided to create ties and spread the weight around. They could be
bred larger, with larger feet with an improved footprint, with
increased tolerance of heat, etc.
The oxen used over much of the world looks very little like the
ancestral breed from which it was derived, as with most cattle. Again
the issue here is the focus of domestication.
Meso and south americans were focused on agriculture not pastoral
activities, whereas their clothing was made from cotton and animal
hair (renewable with respect to the animal), and animal meat except
for hunter gatherers on plains and in jungles was a rare commodity.
The cow has been primarily breed for meat and milk, leather is minor
biproduct whereas being a draught animals extends the usefulness of
the animal. In most societies a horse was a luxury, in Japan for
instance only the weathy and powerful could afford horses, the same
is true for china and most of the orient. Look at war, most of the
soldiers were typically on foot, with only a small proportion of the
soldiers on mounts. In the plains many indians did not use or have
horses even after they became numerous. There are a set of peculiar
circumstances that developed in certain areas in which the preferance
was on livestock and not on agriculture, in the middle east and
africa different classes of people raised livestock versus those that
grew crops, reflecting the stratification of societies during the
late bronze age and early iron age. However this came at considerable
sacrifice of the health of the societies because they became
increasingly dependent on a few crops and one or two domesticants.
The Irish Potato famine being a good example.
If one is an agrarian based society like mesoamerica one has to
really focus on domesticant diversity, whereas fruits are needed that
supply missing amino acids in grains, fat, etc. In mesoamerica we see
that avocados, beans, chiles, cactus, etc, and one of the nutritional
deficiencies likely is tryptophan, which happens to be rather
abundant in turkeys, a domesticant of central america. Neccesity is
the mother of invention. In northern mexico, for instance, now, the
land is clearly more suitable for exotic foods such as cactus, and
pastoral herding (goats) however in the precolumbian times the area
was occupied by hunter/gatherers and opportunistic agrarian
societies, so from that point of veiw they were on the threshold of
pastoral herding activities. The basque sheep herders from N. Spain
managed to make inroads in these societies and sheep and goat farming
became popular. That's why the chalupa is named after the basque word
for boat. Some of the favored dishes in mexico are made with the
brains and intestines of animals (menudo, tripitas, etc). I can very
well understand this reasoning, being forced to abandon meat for
almost a decade these dishes provide missing essential fatty acids
lacking in a fish/vegetarian diet. Turkey is also good in this
regard. So the 'soul' of the mesoamerican appears to revolve around
the concept of optimization of resources so that many can survive,
and animals present mainly as suppliments in specific areas were
agrarian food stuffs are inadequat. This is why we shouldn't be too
surprised that the central valley of mexico was supporting so many
people before 1520, and likely equal numbers spread around the rest
of mexico and adjoining central american regions.
As was mentioned last year, the finding of a city of 5000 years age
was accompanied by the find also of 15 different plant stuffs within
the settlement, of those 15 about half were known to be domesticated
before 5000 years ago and the other half are currently domesticated
and sold as packaged goods, even as far north as the US. This has to
be taken in light that 15000 years ago or so these people would have
arrived in the region, and there is no evidence they brought
domesticants with them, so even if they had 10 domesticants 10 over
10,000 years is alot considering the level of isolation from the
oldworld and the differences in cultural critical mass. My thinking
is that the mesoamerica culture probably had a taboo against draught
animals because they were an unneccesary or foul luxury. Whereas for
the llamas that lived in the highlands of the andes this was
tolerable, and the turkeys protein was a neccesity.
Philip Deitiker
Tom McDonald <tmcdon...@nohormelcharter.net> . . . :
> Teotihuacan, she can peer into the past using us as her research
> gnomes.
You mean green polar pygmies, don't you?
Tom McDonald
> Tom McDonald wrote:
>
>> Alaca wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>
>
>>> Here is how the Norse brought the
>>> wheels and the draft animals to NA
>>> http://tinyurl.com/97674
>
>
>> That looks like the poor attempt Vikings would make at tailgating.
>>
>> That's 'tailgating' as in food and fun in the parking lot before a
>> game, not the kind of 'tailgating' some of the Vikings did on their
>> ships in Minneapolis.
>
>
>>> and here the bishop of Vinland
>>> makes a wheely after delivering
>>> a stone slab to Kensington
>>> http://tinyurl.com/be4dn
>
>
>> I don't think that's the Bishop of Vinland. By his helmet, I'd say
>> he's the Bishop of Mid-New-Continent-Greater Finland, America.
>>
>> If you look very carefully, you can see the tip of his cocoanut bowl.
>
>
> Your eyes are better then mine. Where do you see
> his coconut?
His coconut is unprotected on the top of his neck. The coconut
bowl is in a saddlebag.
> Is it silver mounted?
I don't know what sexual position it is in.
> I wonder where the collected tithes are. In the tires?
Haven't you seen "Easy Rider"? It's in the gas tank.
> It is clear that he uses butternut oil as fuel.
OK.
Tom McDonald
That's just you, Phil. The rest of us are gnomes.
nos...@spammers.of.the.world.unite.com
<VtS...@nospam.net> said:
>nos...@spammers.of.the.world.unite.com wrote:
>> Apparently on date Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:32:52 -0400, VtSkier
>> <VtS...@nospam.net> said:
>>
>>>I have no particular doubt that wheels were known pre-
>>>Columbus and pre-Leif in the new world. The just simply
>>>weren't used for transport, or if they were they weren't
>>>used enough to leave physical evidence.
>> A toy llama teaches the child how to lead a llama about, perhaps also with a
>> pack on the back of it, but unless you put wheels on the feet it will just
>> topple over.
>>
>> So the wheels are necessary for the toy but have nothing to do with the real
>> thing.
>
>True enough and maybe the end of it.
>
>But...
>Wheels to make it possible to lead a toy llama,
>especially if you put a pack on it should lead to
>the observation/conclusion that it might be
>useful to have a wheeled vehicle to help "lighten
>your load".
It would lighten the load for the llama. For the child, carrying load and llama
upstairs to bed becomes two journeys or twice the weight.
>Apparently wheeled toys have been found from
>the Andes, to the Valley of Mexico to Florida and
>maybe other places I'm not aware of.
>
>If you find a wheeled toy in one area and the
>wheels don't get used for useful worked, then
>maybe you can write it off as a taboo against
>using wheels for that society. But would all
>of the societies having wheeled toys have a
>taboo against using wheels for useful work?
The facts are that wheels certainly existed in these areas but nobody has found
any evidence of transportation using them. Thus the game is to speculate why
they found no use for them.
Living near a forest as a child, I found that heavy loads could be carried
quite effectively by finding a fallen branch, strapping the load to that and
dragging it along. A wheeled vehicle would have tended to bog down in the mud /
leaves, and would keep getting stuck against surface roots, etc.
Adding the idea of hills and mountains being more of a factor, I don't see
anything too odd about a culture in particular areas that didn't bother much
with wheels, despite knowing about them.
Alaca
> "VtSkier" wrote
>> Philip Deitiker wrote:
>>> Alan Crozier wrote
>>>> I think the problem was not that they didn't have the wheel in
>>> America, but
>>>> that they did not have draught animals.
>>> llamas
>> Have you ever seen llamas being used to draw
>> a wagon?
> Dogs were once commonly used to pull wagons. Check out the working
> class.
Here are nine fine examples
http://www.hollandse-smoushond.nl/hondekarren.htm
There is much more to find in Dutch.
Here is a medieval English one
http://tinyurl.com/drfax
--
º°º°º°º < Peter Alaca > º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°
Alaca
kahul1tbia3se45tl...@4ax.com,
Yes, I have done forestry work, and a good
flat spreading branche is a great tool. A good
(prepared) one is worth keeping for a while.
> A wheeled vehicle would have
> tended to bog down in the mud / leaves, and would keep getting stuck
> against surface roots, etc.
>
> Adding the idea of hills and mountains being more of a factor, I
> don't see anything too odd about a culture in particular areas that
> didn't bother much with wheels, despite knowing about them.
I guess for many a society without wheeled
transport is difficult to imagine
Alaca
Here is the real Bishop, after smoking
someof real good Minnesota tithe.
A big lump of it is in his left hand.
Alaca
> Here is the real Bishop, after smoking
> someof real good Minnesota tithe.
> A big lump of it is in his left hand.
Oops! Here is the link
http://tinyurl.com/butcf
--
P.A.
Philip Deitiker
news:435f7886$0$47709$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl by "Alaca"
<P.A...@24105.nn> . . . :
> Oops! Here is the link
> http://tinyurl.com/butcf
Error: Not array - array expected *** in function "(Unknown)" ***
line: if ((primary[2]) != "BM") then...endif
Alaca
> "Alaca" wrote
>
>> Oops! Here is the link
>> http://tinyurl.com/butcf
>
> Error: Not array - array expected *** in function "(Unknown)" ***
> line: if ((primary[2]) != "BM") then...endif
Strange! It worked fine. I always check.
Try this other 350 character link
http://tinyurl.com/dstqy
It that fails again, try this 66 one
http://tinyurl.com/e43jp
and click the bishop
Nanaboso
little to do with the Aztecs and I don't think much is known about
sacrificing humans in Teotihuacan except for the remains found inside some
of the pyramids.
The toy with wheels by the way, was found on the island of Jaina.
I_E_Johansson
"Nanaboso" <h-r...@online.no> skrev i meddelandet
news:UJKdnWs0q8M...@telenor.com...
Was any other interesting objects found close by?
Inger E
>
>
VtSkier
Quite correct. Both Nahuatl words but Teotihuacan was
pretty much in ruins by the time the Aztecs built
Tenochtitlan. Both in the Valley of Mexico and both
pretty much subsumed by modern Mexico City.
nos...@spammers.of.the.world.unite.com
said:
>It that fails again, try this 66 one
>http://tinyurl.com/e43jp
>and click the bishop
This one works. Odd that red and white seems unusual, I've played with the red
pieces many times.
Alaca
> "Alaca"said:
>> It that fails again, try this 66 one
>> http://tinyurl.com/e43jp
>> and click the bishop
> This one works. Odd that red and white seems unusual, I've played
> with the red pieces many times.
I don't understand you here.
The BM pieces are all white (now),
http://tinyurl.com/cqqc5
and here is a very red "bishop" from
Edinburgh http://tinyurl.com/crfut
although here they look very grey
http://tinyurl.com/9co6u
nos...@spammers.of.the.world.unite.com
said:
>nospam.spammers.of.the.world.unite.com wrote:
>> "Alaca"said:
>
>>> It that fails again, try this 66 one
>>> http://tinyurl.com/e43jp
>>> and click the bishop
>
>> This one works. Odd that red and white seems unusual, I've played
>> with the red pieces many times.
>
>I don't understand you here.
>The BM pieces are all white (now),
> http://tinyurl.com/cqqc5
>and here is a very red "bishop" from
>Edinburgh http://tinyurl.com/crfut
>although here they look very grey
>http://tinyurl.com/9co6u
My point is that chess sets from my youth were sometimes red and white, and
they were sometimes black and white.
Speculation leads me to think that ebony and ivory were, like the keys of a
piano, the reason chess sets turned into black and white. I recall a few games
with blue and yellow pieces; I think probably this was a seventies fad.
End of the day, I'm surprised that the BM see something curious about red and
white chess sets, this seems to me traditional.
Maybe I'm overly twitchy about the British Museum using the word "findspot" :)
Tom McDonald
> Philip Deitiker wrote:
>
>> "Alaca" wrote
>>
>>> Oops! Here is the link
>>> http://tinyurl.com/butcf
>>
>>
>> Error: Not array - array expected *** in function "(Unknown)" ***
>> line: if ((primary[2]) != "BM") then...endif
>
>
> Strange! It worked fine. I always check.
> Try this other 350 character link
> http://tinyurl.com/dstqy
>
> It that fails again, try this 66 one
> http://tinyurl.com/e43jp
> and click the bishop
>
Ah! From the Orkney chess set. (Or was it the Lewis set?)
Tom McDonald
I would never presume to contradict such a powerful Anishnabe
entity as yourself, Nanaboujou!
But I was combining two things: Inger's desire to find
ways to show that the Old World
gave rise to most of the good stuff in the New World, and her
desire to hold open the possibility that wheels were widely used
in Mesoamerica before Columbus, but just haven't been found yet.
To that point, I thought Teotihuacan was a better site than
Tenochtitlan because it mostly still exists (although they've
built a Wal Mart less than a mile from the Pyramid of the
Moon--Die capitalist pigs@!), it has been extensively
investigated, and not iota one has been found that would remotely
suggest the existence of wheels.
Also, Inger referred to wheeled toys found dating to about 500
AD. This would be while Teotihuacan was still going strong, and
several hundred years before Tenochtitlan was a glimmer in the
mind of a Chichimec shaman.
Alaca
Lewis, main island of the Hebrides.
--
P.A.
jaded
experience of feudal China
was instituted in the New World. The ideal Taoist empire was a common
topic during the T'ang dynasty and before. Chapter 80 of the Tao Te
Ching gives a prescription for the ideal state; a state that would not
be harrassed by the mobile mongols;. A state where the farmers and
craftsmen would prosper because they had no use for the wheel, or
written language, where they had no desire to visit the next village,
where they reverted to the use of knotted cords instead of written
characters.
In a feudal agrarian Taoist utopia, farmers needed to stay put, but
they also needed to be free of maurauding mongols on horseback and
chariot.