Unmasking AIT

[Husky]

^ Ramana's post with PDF.



So sorry, really don't want to eclipse your post.



Thanks for the PDF link. I had downloaded it and stored it, but never read it. Felt the self-entitled confession in the title and abstract as the only thing that could interest me, rather than their grand theorising of how aliens now next own and authored the IVC too via the oryanism excuse. Oryanists are just like that.





Anyway, related to the previous post.



Turns out aliens [oryanists most likely] have indeed invented such a thing as "true chariots" (wha?), as opposed to untrue ones. Not sure what the definition is.



en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariot

Early Indo-Iranians

The earliest fully developed true chariots known are from the chariot burials of the Andronovo (Timber-Grave) sites of the Sintashta-Petrovka Proto-Indo-Iranian culture in modern Russia and Kazakhstan from around 2000 BC. This culture is at least partially derived from the earlier Yamna culture. It built heavily fortified settlements, engaged in bronze metallurgy on an industrial scale and practiced complex burial rituals reminiscent of Hindu rituals known from the Rigveda and the Avesta. The Sintashta-Petrovka chariot burials yield the earliest spoke-wheeled true chariots. The Andronovo culture over the next few centuries spread across the steppes from the Urals to the Tien Shan, likely corresponding to the time of early Indo-Iranian cultures.

Interesting that the covered chariot from 3000 BCE in IVC's Harrappa, which is within the bounds of ancient India, pre-dates the 'Proto-Indo-Iranian' "true chariot" in modern Russia & Kazakhstan by a full millennium.

But then, its existing backwards in time - not to mention in the oh-so-wrong place of Bharatam - means it is obviously not a true chariot and therefore doesn't count.

But will Oryanists claim the true chariot to be an independent "IE" innovation -in the urheimat of irgendwo- and not copied/inspired/derived from the older IVC chariot (which is definitely a chariot, even if not allowed as a true one)? Hmmm.





Wiki mentions that the earliest horse-drawn carts (i.e. 4 wheelers etc) dated to 3000 BCE Mesopotamia:

The horse drawn wheeled vehicle probably originated in Mesopotamia about 3000 BC. The earliest depiction of vehicles in the context of warfare is on the Standard of Ur in southern Mesopotamia, c. 2500 BC. These are more properly called wagons or carts and were still double-axled and pulled by oxen, or a hybrid of a donkey and a female onager,[1] named Kunga in the city of Nagar which was famous for breeding them.[2]

(Wonder how the natives pronounced this city of "Nagar". But it's just 2 syllables, I shouldn't play word games.)



This next is a very interesting claim the wackypedia page makes, with no ref given and admitting to no more than speculation (use of "most likely"):

The invention of the wheel most likely took place in Europe.

About the 1600 BCE again in the following. Seems like an odd date:



librarything.com/topic/141380

Chariot warfare, along with 'the Greeks', came to Greece ca.1600BC ... similar in the takeover of nthwestern India by the Aryans, of southern Mesopotamia by the Kassites, of Egypt by the Hyksos, of Mitanni by Aryans ... All of the takeovers occurred within a few generations after the perfection, around the middle of the C17thBC, of chariot warfare ..."(pp170-172).

The fall of Troy is dated 13th century BCE. We know the Trojans and Greeks used chariots as per Homeros.

Between 1600 and 13th century BCE is about 400 years give or take. Not long enough to forget origins of an earlier homeland. This is from memory of Homer, but I don't recall the Aegeans reminiscing about prior origins outside their Greek regions. Of course Homeros' is not the only work on the subject of Ilium, but still. And ancient Greeks traced their ancientry in their space to much longer ago than that: to kings and cities well before, and speaking of more ancient ages of their history, all in their own space. Sort of like Indians and the Chinese etc.





Totally irrelevant factoid (but which seemed interesting) is that the ancient Romans were "surprisingly much shorter on average" than people today, as per a lecturer after their visits to European sites that preserved remains of ancient Romans.



Seems to be confirmed:



quora.com/How-tall-was-the-average-Roman-soldier

How tall was the average Roman soldier?

4 Answers

Gilbert TaylorGilbert Taylor, Long distance hiker, reader, student

2 upvotes by Kim Beerden and Konstantin Silin



Most people in the time of Ancient Rome, at least in the Mediterranean region, were between five and five and a half feet tall. Studies concerning the remains found in places like Herculaneum and Pompeii have helped solidify this estimate.

Eric Moore, Security Contractor, History Buff, Ma... (more)

3 upvotes by Chris Barnes, Quora User, and Quora User



Between 5 and 5'4, the Romans were not tall people and that's why they called the Celt's and Germans (Who were much taller) giants at times, what they lacked in size they made up in conditioning and stamina.



Julius Caesar commented on the short stature of his men whom he lead, but then he stood 5'7



Written 8 Jun, 2014. 953 views.

The previous post by Ramana contains a link to the PDF by Kar.