Is Rigvedic “Ratha” Primarily a “Wheeled Vehicle” or a “Spoked-Wheel Chariot”?

 

 

Is Rigvedic “Ratha” Primarily a “Wheeled Vehicle” or a “Spoked-Wheel Chariot”?

Shrikant G. Talageri

 

“Ratha” (along with perhaps the word “samudra”) is the most misinterpreted – and deliberately and calculatedly misinterpreted − single word in the Rigveda in the context of historical interpretation of the text. It is very regularly depicted as automatically and specifically meaning a spoked-wheel chariot. That it most typically (but not absolutely always) refers to a spoked-wheel chariot in post-Rigvedic texts is certain. But does it also inevitably refer to a spoked-wheel chariot in the Rigveda also?

For example, a question “specific meaning of ‘ratha’ in the Rigveda” on Google gives us the Google AI Overview answer:

“In the Rigveda, ratha primarily means a swift, light, two-wheeled chariot pulled by horses, built for war, elite travel, and the transport of deities…

War Vehicle: It was the premier vehicle of Vedic chieftains and gods (like Indra and the Ashvins), distinct from the heavier, four-wheeled ox cart (anas). [1, 2, 3, 4]

Craftsmanship: Rigvedic hymns praise the ratha as an engineering marvel meticulously fashioned by skilled carpenters (rbhus), featuring spoked wheels, a wooden frame, and a central axle.”

A question “Avestan words for “spokes’ of spoked wheels” gives us a Google AI Overview answer which includes the following gratuitous statement:

“The term raθa- is specifically significant because it identifies a vehicle with spoked wheels, distinguishing it from older, heavy solid-wheeled carts.”

 

And in every historical interpretation of the text, and especially in debates and discussions, it is firmly assumed that ratha refers to a spoked-wheel chariot:

"those familiar with Indo-European linguistic paleontology and with the archeological evidence in Eurasia agree that the use of the domesticated horse spread out of the steppes of the Ukraine, and so did the horse-drawn two- wheeled battle chariot…these features spread into India along with the migration of Indo-Aryan speakers." (HOCK 1999a:12-13).

"linguistic and textual studies confirm the presence of an outside, Indo-Aryan speaking element, whose language and spiritual culture has definitely been introduced, along with the horse and the spoked wheel chariot, via the BMAC area into northwestern South Asia" (WITZEL 2000a:§15)

 

Is this interpretation valid or likely? Strongly though vested interests in the field of academic study will insist that the word in the Rigveda inevitably refers to a spoked-wheel chariot, such a view is utterly untenable and it is time this is made clear on the basis of the data and evidence. Of course, the strongly entrenched academic lobbies will still continue to insist on their wrong interpretation, but it should be on record once and for all that that interpretation goes against the data and evidence.

 

The basic rule for the interpretation of any word in the Rigveda is that it must fit into two frames or paradigms:

1. The frame of cognate words in other Indo-European languages.

2. The frame of its occurrences in the Rigveda and the context of the occurrences of fundamentally related words within the Rigveda.

It will be seen that the data in every respect makes it clear that ratha originally meant only “wheeled vehicle” and later, after the invention and innovation of spoked wheels, the name increasingly came to be applied to this new type of vehicle that had spoked wheels.

We will examine the data and evidence as follows:

I. The wheeled-vehicle-dominant culture of the Rigveda.

II. The PIE wheeled-vehicle heritage.

III. The Archaeological Harappan Record of Wheeled Vehicles.

IV. “Wheeled Vehicles” or “Spoked-Wheel Vehicles”?

 

I. The wheeled-vehicle-dominant culture of the Rigveda

The following is the distribution of the word ratha and its derivatives in the Rigveda:

Ratha in the Rigveda (in 408 hymns, 704 verses):

I. 6.2; 9.8; 11.1; 13.4; 14.12; 16.2; 20.3; 22.2,4; 25.3,18; 30.16,18,19; 34.2,5,7,9,10,12; 35.2,4,5,6; 36.18; 37.1; 38.12; 39.6; 44.2; 46.3,7,8; 47.2,3,6,7,9; 48.3,7,10; 49.2; 50.8,9; 51.12,14; 52.1; 53.9; 54.3,6; 55.7; 56.1; 58.3; 61.4; 64.9; 66.6; 70.7; 71.6; 74.7; 77.3; 82.4; 84.3,6; 85.4,5; 87.2; 88.1,2; 92.16; 94.1,8,10,11; 100.10,16; 102.3,5,9; 106.1-6; 108.1; 111.1,3; 112.2,12,22; 113.14; 116.1,4,17,18,20; 117.2,13,15; 118.1-5,10; 119.1,2,3,5,7; 120.10,11; 121.14; 122.7,8,11,15; 123.1,5,7; 125.3; 126.4; 129.1,10; 130.5,6; 134.1,3; 135.4; 139.3,4; 140.1,12; 141.8,12; 144.3; 148.3; 157.1,2,3,6; 158.6; 161.3,6,7; 163.8; 164.2,3,25; 166.5,9; 167.5; 173.4,5; 175.3; 177.2,3; 178.3; 180.1,4,9,10; 181.3; 182.1,2; 183.2,3; 186.8; 187.10 (in 86 hymns, 168 verses).

II. 2.3; 4.4,6; 8.1; 10.2; 12.7,8; 15.4; 16.3,6; 17.3; 18.1,3,5,7; 19.6; 20.1; 23.3,13; 24.15; 27.12,16; 29.4; 31.1,2,3,4,7; 34.7,8; 37.5; 39.2; 40.3; 41.1 (in 21 hymns, 34 verses).

III. 1.17; 2.1,8,15; 3.5,6; 4.11; 6.8,9; 11.5; 14.1,7; 15.5; 26.1; 30.11; 31.20; 33.2,9,10; 35.1,2,4; 36.6; 41.9; 44.1; 45.2; 49.4; 53.1,5,6; 54.13; 58.3,8,9; 60.4; 61.2 (in 23 hymns, 35 verses).

IV. 1.3,8; 2.4,14; 4.8,10; 9.8; 10.2; 14.1,3,4; 15.2; 16.11,20,21; 17.21; 19.5,11; 20.11; 21.11; 22.11; 23.11; 24.11; 30.18; 31.14; 33.8; 36.1,2; 37.4; 38.3,6; 41.10; 43.2,5; 44.1,2,4,5; 45.1,2,3,7; 46.2,4,5; 47.3; 48.1-5; 56.4 (in 29 hymns, 52 verses).

V. 1.11; 2.11; 5.3; 10.5; 11.2; 17.4; 18.3; 29.9,15; 30.1,4,5; 31.9,11; 33.3,5; 35.5,7,8; 36.3,5,6; 37.3; 41.3,6; 43.5,8; 50.5; 52.9; 53.2,4,5,10; 54.11,13; 55.1-9; 56.6-9; 57.1,2,6,7; 58.6; 60.1,2,4; 61.12,13,17-19; 63.1,5,7; 66.3; 73.3,5,10; 74.3,8; 75.1,4,5,9; 76.1; 77.3; 79.2; 80.2; 83.3,7; 86.4; 87.8 (in 38 hymns, 81 verses).

VI. 5.3; 7.2; 18.9; 20.5; 21.1; 22.5; 26.4; 27.8; 29.2; 31.5; 34.2; 35.1; 37.1,3; 44.19,24; 45.14,15; 46.2; 47.19,24,27,28,31; 48.9; 49.4,5,15; 51.6,9; 53.1; 55.1,2,6; 56.2,3; 57,6; 59.5; 61.13; 62.2,7,10; 63.5,7; 65.2; 66.7; 68.10; 75.6-8 (in 32 hymns, 50 verses).

VII. 2.5,11; 5.5; 7.4; 11.1; 18.22; 21.3; 23.3; 27.5; 32.2,10,11; 34.1; 36.4; 37.1; 39.1; 41.6; 44.4; 48.1; 56.21; 66.12,15; 67.1,3,8; 68.3; 69.1,3,5; 71.2-4; 72.1,2; 74.2,6; 75.6; 77.5; 78.1,4; 90.5; 91.5; 95.1 (in 30 hymns, 42 verses).

VIII. 1.24,25,31,32; 2.35; 3.15; 4.9,13; 5.2,10.19,22,28,34,35; 7.17,28; 8.2,10,11,14; 9.8,12,18; 10.6; 11.2; 12.3; 13.23,31; 19.8,35; 20.8,10,12; 22.1,4,5,9,15; 23.2; 25.2,22; 26.1,4,20,23; 31.3,15; 33.4,11,14,18; 35.22; 38.2; 44.27; 45.7,9,39; 46.10,24; 47.5; 48.5; 50.8; 56.5; 57.1; 58.3; 61.12; 65.4; 68.1,4,13,16; 69.15,16; 70.1; 72.6; 73.1,2,13; 74.10,14; 75.1; 80.4-6; 83.3; 84.1; 85.7,8; 91.7; 94.1; 95.1; 98.9; 99.7; 101.2; 103.7,10 (in 50 hymns, 93 verses).

IX. 3.5; 10.1,2; 15.1; 16.2; 21.4,6; 22.1; 36.1; 38.1; 53.2; 62.17; 64.10; 66.26; 67.17; 69.9; 71.5; 75.1; 76.2; 78.4; 83.5; 86.2,40,45; 87.9; 88.2; 89.4; 90.1; 91.1; 92.1; 93.4; 94.3; 96.1,2; 97.6,27,37,46,48,49,50; 98.2; 103.5; 107.13; 111.3; 112.4 (in 35 hymns, 46 verses).

X. 1.5; 4.6; 6.3; 10.7,8; 11.9; 12.9; 15.10; 17.8; 23.1,3; 26.1,5,8,9; 29.2,8; 33.5; 35.6; 37.3; 39.1,4,7,11,12,14; 40.1,5,6; 41.1,2; 44.2; 47.5; 49.6; 51.6; 53.7; 59.1; 60.2,5; 63.4,14; 64.5,7,10,12; 70.3,5; 75.6,8,9; 76.7; 77.8; 78.4,5; 84.1; 85.26; 89.2; 91.7; 92.1; 93.7; 95.8; 96.6,12; 98.4,9,10; 99.4; 101.7; 102.1-3,6,11; 103.4,5,10; 106.11; 107.11; 112.2; 114.6,10; 117.5; 119.3; 130.7; 132.4,7; 133.1; 135.3-5; 138.3; 142.5; 143.1; 148.3; 160.1; 168.1,2; 171.1; 176.3; 178.1; 181.1 (in 64 hymns, 103 verses).

It will be seen that ratha is very prominently mentioned throughout every part of every single Book of the Rigveda, in a manner which leaves no doubt that throughout the entire Rigvedic period, a/the wheeled vehicle known as ratha was an intrinsic part of the Rigvedic ethos.

The important question is whether this word ratha refers merely to a wheeled vehicle or to spoked-wheeled vehicles, and we will examine that point after seeing the complete data on the subject.

 

II. The PIE wheeled-vehicle heritage

An interesting article on this subject by Lubotsky indirectly gives us the Four Stages of Development of Indo-European wheeled-Vehicle Terminology:

https://www.academia.edu/106978888/Indo_European_and_Indo_Iranian_Wagon_Terminology_and_the_Date_of_the_Indo_Iranian_Split

 

Stage 1: Before the Anatolian Split:

He points out, after giving all the data, that the data is “compatible with the idea that the Anatolians split off from the rest of the Indo-Europeans before the invention of the wheel.”, since “Anatolian attests only the terms for the yoke (Hitt. iūk-), for the pole (Hitt. ḫišša-), and for the connection of the two (Skt. dhúr- ‘joint of the pole and the yoke’,Hitt.tūrii̯e/a- zi ‘to harness’). These terms, however, could also refer to the construction of sleighs or plows”.

The Anatolian branch is known to be the first branch to have split from the other 11 IE branches, Therefore according to Lubotsky, the data here indicates the earliest stage before this split where the wheel (or wheeled vehicle) was not yet invented.

 

Stage II: After the Anatolian Split:

Lubotsky gives a list of reconstructed “Wheel and Wagon Words” in Proto-Indo-European:

“We can reconstruct five words of wheel and wagon terminology for Proto-Indo-European (PIE), viz. the words for ‘wheel’ (2×), ‘axle’, ‘thill’, and the verb ‘to convey in a vehicle’:

1. – PIE *kʷekʷlo- ‘wheel’ (Skt. cakrá-, YAv. caxra-, ON hvél, Gr. κύκλος; Toch. B kokale ‘wagon’);

2. – PIE *HrotHo- ‘wheel’ (Lat. rota, OIr. roth, OHG rad, Lith. rãtas ‘wheel’, rataĩ pl. ‘chariot’; Skt. rátha- and YAv. raϑa- ‘chariot’);

3. – PIE *h 2 eḱs- ‘axle’ (Skt. ákṣa-, Gr. ἄξων, Lat. axis, OE eax);

4. – PIE *h 2 eiHs- ‘pole, thill’ (Skt. īṣā́-, YAv. aēša, Hitt. ḫišša-, Sln. oję̑ , Lith. íena; Gr. οἴαξ ‘handle’);

5. – PIE *ueǵʰ- ‘to convey in a vehicle’ (Skt. vah-, Av. vaz-, Gr. (Pamph.) ϝεχέτω, Lat. uehō, Lith. vežù, OCS vezǫ; OHG wegan ‘to move’).

This list can be extended with at least five more terms:

1. – PIE *iug- ‘yoke’ (Skt. yugá-, YAv. yuua-, Hitt. iūk-, Gr. ζυγόν, Lat. iugum, OS juk, OCS igo);

2. – PIE *ieug- ‘to yoke, harness’ (Skt. yuj-, Av. yuj-, Gr. ζεύγνῡμι, Lat. iungō, Lith. jùngti);

3. – PIE *dʰur- ‘joint, pivot of the chariot pole and the yoke’ (Skt. dhúr- ‘joint of the chariot pole and the yoke, the pole and the yoke together’, Hitt. tūrii̯e/a- zi ‘to harness’), possibly identical with the word for ‘door’, if it originally meant ‘pivot’;

4. – PIE *h 3 nebʰ- ‘wheel hub’ (Skt. nábhya-, OPr. nabis, OHG naba);

5. – PIE *ḱomieh 2 - ‘yoke pin’ (Skt. śámyā-, YAv. simā-, Arm. samik’ ‘pair of yoke sticks’, sametik’ ‘yoke band’ (unless an Iranian LW), Eng. hame ‘horse collar’, which has replaced the yoke with the pins rather recently)”.

 

If we analyze the occurrence of his ten words in the 12 branches of Indo-European languages, we get the following statistics

Indo-Aryan 10:  5+5

Iranian 7:  4+3

Greek 6:  4+2

Germanic 6:  4+2

Baltic 5:  3+2

Italic 5:  3+2

Hittite 4:  2+2

Slavic 3:  2+1

Celtic 1:  1+0

Tocharian 1:  1+0

Armenian 1:  0+1

Albanian 0:  0+0

It need hardly be pointed out that every single one of the 10 reconstructed words is found only in “Indo-Aryan”/Vedic Sanskrit but not in any one of the other 11 branches. This is a strong indicator of the fact that “Indo-Aryan”/ Vedic Sanskrit alone represents the fullest extent of the common PIE heritage [a phenomenon I have also pointed out elsewhere in respect of the common reconstructed “pastoral”/dairy PIE vocabulary. And this does not fit in at all within the AIT paradigm but fits in completely within the OIT paradigm.]

Stage III: After the Split Between “Indo-Iranian” and the Other Branches:

Lubotsky points out from the data that Indo-Aryan and Iranian share an even deeper commonality in development of Wheeled Vehicle Terminology after the split between these two branches and all the other branches.

[By AIT logic, this was after the “Indo-Iranians” split from the other branches in the Steppe area, and migrated eastwards towards Central Asia. By OIT logic, this was after all the other branches had migrated westwards from NW India, and only Indo-Aryan and Iranian continued to remain as neighbors and develop in contact with each other in the original area].

It will be seen that while the PIE **HrotHo- simply means “wheel” in the other branches where the word is found (in Italic, Celtic, Germanic and Baltic), it does not mean “wheel” anywhere in the Rigveda or Avesta: everywhere in these two texts it means only “wheeled vehicle”. [In Baltic Lithuanian, the word in the plural refers to a wheeled vehicle, but this is a colloquial use found for example even in modern English (“my wheels” means “my car/vehicle”)]

 

Further, Lubotsky points out that there are important common derived words (derived from ratha), as well as new words developed in common, only in Indo-Aryan and Iranian:

Skt. rathī́-, OAv. raiϑī-

Skt. ráthya-, OAv. raiϑiia- 

Skt. rathe-ṣṭhā́-, YAv. raϑaē-štā-

Skt. yóktra- ‘thong, yoking cord’, YAv. yaoxəδra- ‘halter, bridle’

Skt. abhidhā́nī- ‘horse halter’, YAv. zaraniiō. aiβiδāna- ‘with a golden bridle’

Skt. yā- ‘to drive’, Av. yāman- ‘course’

Skt. avasā́na- ‘resting-place of horses’, OAv. auuaŋhāna- ‘resting-place of horses’

In the context of one of the above words (found late in both textual traditions: in the Atharvaveda and the Young Avesta respectively), Lubotsky notes that “*Habʰi-dʰaH-, literally ‘to put on or against’, is specifically used for bridling or haltering horses, which may indicate a new technology”

 

D. Stage IV: After the Split (or Loss of Cognate Contact) Between Indo-Aryan and Iranian:

But then we come to the field of Spoked Wheel technology, and here we see that Indo-Aryan terminological development continues, but these developments is not shared by Iranian. A question (referred to earlier above) “Avestan words for “spokes’ of spoked wheels” gives us the following Google Overview reply:

“There is no directly attested word for "spoke" in the Avestan language. While Avestan shares a deep heritage with Old Indic (Vedic Sanskrit), it provides far fewer technical terms for chariot parts….”

Lubotsky, in the above article, clearly points out:

“it is conspicuous that we cannot reconstruct the PIIr. terminology for certain parts of the chariot, especially for its most essential part, the spoked wheel (including ‘spoke’, ‘felly’, ‘rim’). This may partly be due to the paucity of Old and Middle Iranian texts, but the fact is that Skt. ará- ‘spoke of a wheel’, nemí- ‘rim (of a wheel)’, and paví- ‘metal felly (of a wheel)’ have no Iranian counterparts”.

These then are the four clear stages of development of Indo-European wheeled vehicle terminology. Only a dogged refusal to accept the facts and data can lead to any conclusion other than that these stages all developed within India.

 

III. The Archaeological Harappan Record of Wheeled Vehicles

But where in India does one find archaeological evidence of this kind of prolific wheeled vehicle culture?

The subject has been dealt with in detail by the eminent archaeologist Mark Kenoyer:

https://www.harappa.com/sites/default/files/pdf/Kenoyer2004_Wheeled%20Vehicles%20of%20the%20Indus%20Valley%20Civilizatio.pdf

 

Just as the Rigveda gives textual details of an extremely wheeled-vehicle-filled culture, the Harappan sites give archaeological proof of an extremely wheeled-vehicle-filled culture. Kenoyer points out in detail in the paper:

1. The evidence for a very wide range of wheeled vehicles in the Harappan sites: 

“Due to the fact that wood remains are not well preserved from Indus sites and there are no graphic depictions of carts, most evidence for wheeled vehicles comes from terracotta and bronze model carts and wheels dating to the Harappan Phase, circa 2600-1900 Be and rare examples of streets with cart tracks (Dales and Kenoyer 1991:Fig.13.41; Wheeler 1947: 85, Plate XXXIX; Wheeler 1968:82-83, 92). Terracotta model yokes similar to modem neck yokes have been found at the site of Nausharo from the Harappa Phase occupations(Period ill) and indicate the use of two bullocks for traction, but it is not clear if these yokes were used for pulling carts or agricultural implements O. F. Jarrige 1994 personal communication)”

He points ou that there is “evidence of both heavy and light wheeled vehicles pulled by bullocks that were discovered at sites such as Mohenjo--Daro, Harappa and Chanhu-daro (Figure 1) over 1000 years earlier than the evidence for horse drawn chariots.”

These show “The long continuity in cart designs of the Indus Valley and the fact that many different types of bullock cart continue to be used even today in Pakistan and India indicate that the original styles of cart were quite effective and that the early designers were able to produce a form that came to be improved upon only with the introduction of ball-bearing axles and rubber tires”

 "wide range of cart types", "diversity in carts and wheels, including depictions of what may be spoked wheels"

“most scholars assume all wheels of the Indus valley were made in this manner. In fact most of the painted motifs consist of diagonal bands that cut across the outer hub face of the wheels and may indicate a type of hollow wall design, a spoked wheel or a composite wheel.”

About "the lighter form of cart…some of them are quite small and may represent vehicles that were used by a single rider for racing or fast transport".

“there is considerable evidence for small light vehicles drawn by two animals or jori and numerous examples have been discovered at Harappa (Figure 6:12).”

“Perhaps the most convincing example of a spoked wheel comes from the site of Rahkigarhi, presumably from the Harappan levels (Figure 8:2) though the excavation report has not yet been published. In this example there are eleven radiating spokes that would have provided considerable support to a light outer rim.”

“Excavations at Harappa have recorded almost 2800 terracotta cart fragments from the Harappa Phase occupation levels, which for the purpose of this paper have been grouped into eight major categories identified by type numbers (520, 530, etc.) assigned for artifact tabulation (Table 3), with short descriptions of each artifact provided in the figure captions.” [The article describes these different categories]

"The diversity of model carts …is quite significant…it is unclear why scholars have ignored the complexity and specialization of Indus transport"

 

2. The evidence for both the antiquity and the purely indigenous development of wheeled-vehicle technology in the Harappan sites:

"The earliest wheeled vehicles were developed in an alluvial plane, but it was in the Indus Valley itself rather than in Central Asia. At Harappa we find evidence for the use of terracotta carts as early as 3500 BC during the Ravi phase"

During the "(Harappa phase 2600-1900 BC) there was a dramatic increase in terracotta cart and wheel types…including depictions of what may be spoked wheels"

"The unique forms and the early appearance of carts…suggest that they are the result of indigenous development and not diffusion from West Asia or Central Asia as proposed by earlier scholars". And again, they are "the result of indigenous processes and not the result of diffusion from mountainous regions to the west"

On the use of carts in the Harappan sites: “Wheeled carts would have been useful for the movement of mud brick and timber to the settlement for construction purposes. While carts may have been the easiest method for transporting bulk materials for short distances across the plains, the lack of roads and bridges would have made it difficult to move goods for any great distance. Long distance trade during this early period was probably carried out along the rivers, using rafts or wooden boats to move larger weights of heavy goods down river to major settlements.”

The Harappan sites show the use of a large number of materials brought from afar: “materials being brought from distant resource areas far from the alluvial plain.”

“Current studies of the raw materials from the Ravi Phase at Harappa by Law (Law 2003) indicate that some of the ground stone may have come from the Suleiman range, some 300 kilometers to the west and south while other rocks derive from the Kirana Hills 100 kIn to the north - northwest of Harappa.”

“Using a modern cart and a pair of bullocks for comparison, an early hollow frame cart could have carried around 50 maunds or 1870 kilos (4114Ibs) which would be the equivalent of around 470 grinding stones or around 270 average sized mud bricks (7.5 x 15 x 30 em, dry weight 7 kg) used in the construction of house walls. Needless to say, the use of a bullock cart would have dramatically changed the amount of stone, mud brick or wood that could be carried for short distances across the plain. It is not unlikely that the increasing need for these commodities and the need for human transport may have been an important stimulus for the invention and development of specific types of wheeled carts that were introduced in the next major phase at the site. Early Harappan, Kot Diji Phase Carts and Wheels (2800-2600 BC) As settlements in the alluvium grew larger it is not surprising to see the emergence of more efficient technologies for transport of heavy and bulk commodities. Larger populations would have stimulated the demand for basic raw materials, tools and commodities, as well as for high value items from distant areas.”

In conclusion, he notes: “Considerable research still needs to be undertaken on the regional styles of carts and wheels in the Indus valley region, especially during the Ravi and Kot Dijian Phases of the Early Harappan period. On the basis of initial results from the analysis at Harappa, the process of bullock cart development in the Indus valley appears to be the result of indigenous invention rather than the diffusion of a technology from other regions. During the course of the Harappan period, the wide diversity of cart types may have been stimulated in part by exposure to different cultural traditions as well as continued local elaboration of an important form of transportation. However, the evidence for trade contacts between the Indus Valley and adjacent regions, such as Mesopotamia and Oman, as well as Central Asia, make it necessary to begin new research on the use of carts and wheels in these regions to determine the extent of cultural borrowing as well as the directionality of any movement of vehicular technology. The presence of an Indus style cart motif on a pot from Inamgaon and the model bronze II chariot" at Daimabad raise important questions about technological diffusion, replacement and synthesis that will have to await more detailed archaeological study.”

 

To summarize the main points of the evidence:

1. Wheeled Vehicle Technology is found in the Harappan civilization from at least 3500 BCE at least.

2. The development of wheeled vehicle types was a completely indigenous development and not borrowed from outside.

3. The wheeled vehicle types exhibit an amazingly wide range and variety. 

4. There are clear indications that various stages of spoked-wheel technology are also present within that range.

 

IV. “Wheeled Vehicles” or “Spoked-Wheel Vehicles”?

And now we come to the crucial question: does the ratha of the Rigveda refer to (solid) wheeled vehicles or to spoked-wheeled vehicles?

This has two aspects:

A. Why is this Important?

B. What does the Evidence Show?

 

IV.A. Why is this Important?

This is important from the historical point of view because it helps us to date the Rigveda as a whole. Spoked wheels were invented in the late third millennium BCE (2300-2000 or so). If the word ratha in the Rigveda refers to (solid) wheeled vehicles, then the Rigveda is pre-2300 BCE, and if the word ratha in the Rigveda refers to spoked wheeled vehicles, then the Rigveda is post-2300 BCE.

According to the AIT or Aryan Invasion Theory, the “Aryans” entered the northwesternmost parts of India after 2000 BCE, and composed the Rigveda much later (1500-1200 BCE or so). If this is to be true, then the Rigveda must be shown to be a completely post-spoked-wheel text and the word ratha in the Rigveda must refer to spoked-wheeled-vehicles. If however the Rigveda is a pre-2300 BCE text, then the Rigveda cannot refer to spoked wheels. To maintain the AIT, it is vital and necessary to insist that the word ratha in the Rigveda primarily or exclusively refers to spoked-wheeled-vehicles. Hence all the quotes given earlier in this article, for example:

1. “the use of the domesticated horse spread out of the steppes of the Ukraine, and so did the horse-drawn two-wheeled battle chariot…these features spread into India along with the migration of Indo-Aryan speakers." (HOCK 1999a:12-13).

2. “linguistic and textual studies confirm the presence of an outside, Indo-Aryan speaking element, whose language and spiritual culture has definitely been introduced, along with the horse and the spoked wheel chariot, via the BMAC area into northwestern South Asia" (WITZEL 2000a:§15).

Note that these scholars do not even blink when pushing the juvenile idea that “Aryans” marched all the way from the Ukraine to northwestern India area, over all kinds of mountainous terrains, riding “spoked two-wheeled battle chariots”.

The third alternative, ignored by both sides (the AIT writers who date the Rigveda as a whole to post-1500 BCE; as well as the anti-AIT writers who date the Rigveda as a whole to pre-3000 BCE), is that the Rigveda is a text whose composition spanned hundreds of years (from pre-3000 BCE to 1500 BCE), and that the hymns in it therefore belong to two distinct eras, the pre-spoked-wheel era as well as the post-spoked-wheel era. And this is the exact picture shown by the data and evidence in the text, as we will see.  

 

IV.B. What does the Evidence Show?

Before examining the evidence in the Rigveda, let us examine two juvenile ideas on the basis of which the AIT writers classify the Rigvedic word ratha as a “light spoked two-wheeled battle chariot” which is “distinct from the heavier, four-(solid)-wheeled ox cart (anas)”:

1. The juvenile idea that a “battle-chariot” has to be a “light spoked two-wheeled chariot”:

The history of battle-chariots, if we examine the case of Sumer, shows that originally they were originally heavier, four-(solid)-wheeled ox or onager carts,  

A question on Google: “Did Sumerians Have war Chariots” gives the answer:

“Yes, the Sumerians used early heavy battle carts or four-wheeled war wagons that functioned as precursors to the classic war chariot. [1, 2]

Design and Structure

Four solid wheels: Unlike later two-wheeled chariots, these early vehicles featured four heavy, solid wooden disk wheels mounted on two axles. [1, 2]

Drawn by equids: Because true horses were not yet tamed or used in Sumer at that time, the carts were pulled by teams of onagers (wild asses) or kunga (a hybrid of a donkey and a Syrian wild onager). [1, 2, 3]

Crew and protection: They typically carried a driver and a fighter—often a spearmen or javelin thrower—sheltered behind a solid, high protective front shield decorated with paneling. [1, 2, 3]

Battlefield Role

Cumbersome movement: Due to their heavy weight and solid wheels, these battle wagons were slow to turn and accelerate, making them less agile than later designs. [1, 2]

Mobile platforms: Rather than functioning as fast shock-attack cavalry, they served as mobile command platforms and elevated striking stations to hurl javelins or trample enemy infantry. [1, 2, 3]

Status symbol: Famous depictions, such as the war panel on the Standard of Ur, show that these expensive and prestigious vehicles were reserved for elite warriors and leaders. [1, 2, 3]”

A question on Google: “Did ancient Mesopotamia have solid wheel vehicles or spoked wheel vehicles” gives the answer:

“Ancient Mesopotamian vehicles initially used solid wheels, and only later adopted spoked wheels. [1, 2]

Solid Wheels (3500–2000 BCE)

The earliest wheeled carts in ancient Mesopotamia used solid wooden discs. Craftsmen made these heavy wheels by fastening wooden planks together. Early military wagons and transport carts depicted in Sumerian art (such as the Standard of Ur) relied on these sturdy, solid designs. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Spoked Wheels (After 2000 BCE)

Lighter spoked wheels appeared around 2000 BCE.

These newer wheels replaced heavy wooden blocks with wooden spokes.

This lighter design allowed for faster, more nimble chariots used in travel and warfare

 

Another question on Google “Did ancient China have solid wheel vehicles or spoked wheel vehicles” gives the answer:

“Ancient China used spoked wheel vehicles, most notably for their famous war chariots starting from the Shang dynasty around 1200 BCE.”

 

Another similar question: “When did ancient Egypt first use spoked wheel vehicles” gives the answer:

“Ancient Egypt first used spoked wheel vehicles around 1700 BCE at the end of the Seventeenth Dynasty or the start of the Eighteenth Dynasty.”

So all these ancient civilizations originally had solid-wheel vehicles, which developed into spoked-wheel vehicles after 2000 BCE after the diffusion of spoked-wheel technology. But these civilizations, especially Mesopotamia (including Sumer) already had full-fledged war-chariot technology involving heavier solid-wheel (four-wheeled) chariots. That the new technology led to much faster, lighter and more efficient vehicles does not negate the fact that war-chariotry in full form existed even in the pre-spoked-wheel era.

 

Where did spoked-wheels originate, and from where did this all-round diffusion take place after 2000 BCE? It was from the “Indo-Aryan” Vedic area: the “Mitanni Indo-Aryans” took spoked-wheel technology to West Asia to begin with. The evidence of the common PIE wheeled-vehicle terminology and the ratha-rich hymns and verses of the Rigveda, already detailed above, make it clear that spoked-wheels originated in the Vedic period and area

https://talageri.blogspot.com/2022/08/evidence-for-oit-beyond-mitanni.html

https://talageri.blogspot.com/2024/03/the-finality-of-mitanni-evidence.html

The claim that spoked-wheels were invented in the Sintashta culture also falls flat since it will be clear that spoked wheels were already present in India before 2000 BCE. The Mitanni-driven westward export of spoked-wheel technology diffused to the Sintashta culture also, whence it spread westwards into Europe:

A question “earliest evidence of spoked wheel chariots in Greece and Europe” on Google gives the answer:

“The earliest evidence of spoked-wheel chariots in wider Europe dates back to around 2000–1900 BC with the Sintashta culture in the Russian steppes and Urals, while in Greece, they arrived and appeared in Mycenaean contexts by around 1500 BC. [1, 2]

Europe Origins

Sintashta Culture (c. 1950–1880 BC): The oldest physical remains of true, light, horse-drawn spoked-wheel chariots were discovered in grave burials of the Sintashta culture in the Chelyabinsk Oblast region of Russia. [1]

Central/Eastern Europe (c. 2000 BC): Spoked wheels emerged as a revolutionary upgrade from heavy solid or cross-bar wooden disk wheels, spreading across the Eurasian steppes and into Central/Eastern Europe. [1, 2]

Early Depictions (c. 2500–2000 BC): Ceramic models and indirect artistic fragments suggest proto-chariot concepts or wagon developments were moving through Eastern and Central Europe (such as the Baden or Budakalász cultures) around the early-to-mid 2nd and late 3rd millennium BC.”

 

2. The juvenile idea that “ratha’ means “two-wheeled chariot”:

The AIT writers insist that “The term raθa- is specifically significant because it identifies a vehicle with spoked wheels, distinguishing it from older, heavy solid-wheeled carts.”

Within the Rigveda, they insist that it “designates a two-wheeled, spoked-wheel vehicle or chariot, distinct from the heavier, solid-wheeled anas (cart)”.

As to the first point, there is nothing whatsoever either in the IE data or in the Rigveda itself to indicate that ratha means “a vehicle with spoked wheels, distinguishing it from older, heavy solid-wheeled cart”:

1. The IE data, as we saw earlier, does not show the cognates of ratha to mean even “wheeled vehicle” in the other IE branches: Italic Latin rota, Baltic Lithuanian rãtas, Celtic Old Irish roth and Germanic German rad, all mean simply “wheel”. That it has progressed to specifically mean only “wheeled vehicle” in Indo-Aryan and Iranian is clear from the evidence (and the fact that Lithuanian plural rataĩ “wheels” can mean “wheeled vehicle” is a pointer to this)   but there is nothing in the IE data to suggest that it could have progressed a few technological steps further to mean only “spoked-wheeled vehicle” in the Rigveda and Avesta.

2. Within the Rigveda, the word occurs uniformly throughout every part of the text, as we have already seen. But not only is there no reference in any ancient text which tells us even indirectly that ratha means “‘vehicle with spoked wheels’, but does not mean ‘heavy solid-wheeled cart’”.

It may be noted that the Sinauli chariot (the only archaeologically testified wheeled vehicle of very ancient times within India) has two solid unspoked wheels.

Likewise, the thousands of miniature clay and metal cart models discovered at sites like Harappa and Mohenjo-daro have two solid wheels attached via an axle running through perforations on the underside of the cart (often with a prominent central hub).

But the most undeniable evidence lies in the fact that, to this very day, the word ratha, most prominent in temple rathotsavas in respect of temple rathas or chariots, refers primarily to solid-wheeled chariots:

A question on Google, “do temple chariots in india necessarily have spoked wheels?” gives the following Google Overview answer:

“No, temple chariots (ratha or ther) in India do not necessarily have spoked wheels. [1]

While many ceremonial processional cars and architectural stone replicas (such as the famous spoked wheels at the Konark Sun Temple) feature intricate spoked designs, many massive, real-world wooden festival chariots use heavy, solid wooden disk wheels to bear enormous weight safely. [1, 2, 3]

Wheel Variations in Temple Chariots

Solid Wooden Wheels: Large processional temple carts weighing several tons often utilize thick, solid blocks or disks of wood. Solid wheels handle immense vertical loads without the structural stress points found in traditional wooden spokes. [1]

Spoked Wheels: Many decorative, metallic, or smaller ritual chariots—as well as stone chariot-themed architecture—incorporate traditional spoked wheels to reflect classical or mythological imagery associated with ancient Vedic rathas.”

So it is clear that the interpretation of the word ratha as referring to “a two-wheeled, spoked-wheel vehicle or chariot, distinct from the heavier, solid-wheeled anas (cart)” not only does not have any evidence to support it, it goes totally against all the available evidence. And the only reason that interpretation is still being enforced everywhere is because it is vital to the AIT.

 

As to the second point, we have already seen the full-fledged references to the word ratha in every part of every Book of the Rigveda; let us now see the references to “anas” which we are asked to interpret as “cart as opposed to ratha/chariot”:

II. 15.6 (the cart of Dawn).

III. 33.9,10.

IV. 30.10,11 (the cart of Dawn).

VIII. 91.7.

X. 59.10; 73.6 (the cart of Dawn); 85.10,12 (the cart of Dawn); 86.18; 102.1; 138.5 (the cart of Dawn).

1. The term anas is very sparsely found in the Rigveda, and it primarily and regularly refers to the vehicle (i.e the Sun) of Dawn rising in the sky, rather than to a cart: II.15.6;  IV.30.11;  X.73.6; 85.10.12; 138.5. The etymology is clear: anas is originally derived from the same root an- ("to breathe", perhaps indicating the first breath, or birth, of day) as is the later word anala "fire", and anas represents the rising sun.

2. The only other place it appears in the Old Rigveda in the sense of “cart” is in III.33.9,10. But in both the verses, the composer finds it necessary to combine it with the word ratha as “anasā rathā” to indicate that he is referring to a physical cart.

3. It means “cart” only in some of the references in the New Rigveda: VIII.91.7;  X.59.10; 86.18; 102.1.

Derivatives of the word are found only in the Redacted-Hymns/New-Rigveda and/or the later Yajurveda and Atharvaveda:

anaḍuḥ :  III.53.18 (+ 6 times in the Yajurveda and Atharvaveda)

anaḍvān:  − (20 times in the Yajurveda and Atharvaveda)

anaḍvāḥ:  X.59.10; 85.10 (+ 10 times in the Yajurveda and Atharvaveda)

4. In one reference, the verse specifically mentions that the “cart” (of Dawn) has two wheels. 

By all rules of evolutionary logic, the spoked-wheeled chariot evolved from and very much after the solid-wheeled chariot. Here we are being asked to believe that the word ratha, throughout its hundreds of occurrences in every part of the text, refers to a spoked-wheeled chariot, and it is only in the latest part of the text that the composers found it necessary to allocate a separate word (by converting the meaning of an existing word meaning “the vehicle of Dawn” to mean “cart”) to distinguish a “cart” from a “spoked-wheeled chariot”!!

To emphasize the fact that the composers felt the need to distinguish a “cart” from a “spoked-wheeled chariot” only in the latest part of the text, the only other word in the Rigveda actually meaning a “cart” as distinct from a “spoked-wheeled chariot” is found only in Book 10:

śakaṭi: X.146.3.

All this clearly shows that the word ratha simply meant a “wheeled vehicle” in the Rigveda until the very last part of the Rigvedic Period (2200- 1500 BCE) when spoked wheels were invented and spoked-wheeled vehicles became so much more common a part of the Rigvedic culture that words had to be coined to distinguish the old solid-wheeled vehicle from the new spoked-wheeled vehicle which had replaced the older vehicle in importance and name. If anas and śakaṭi were old words, they would have been found throughout the Rigveda, but then the word ratha (found throughout the Rigveda) originally exclusively referred to the old solid-wheeled vehicle before the new spoked-wheeled vehicle was invented. Unless we are being asked to believe that there was never a word for the old solid-wheeled vehicle before the very last period of Rigvedic composition!

 

So finally we come to the actual solid evidence in the Rigveda which shows that the hymns of the Rigveda span both the “wheeled-vehicle” eras, i.e. that the hymns in the Rigveda belong to two distinct eras, the pre-spoked-wheel era as well as the post-spoked-wheel era:

I have already shown in my article “FINAL VERSION OF THE CHRONOLOGICAL GULF BETWEEN THE OLD RIGVEDA AND THE NEW RIGVEDA: [WITH THE THE HYMN-AND-VERSE WISE LIST OF NEW WORDS AND OTHER NEW ELEMENTS IN THE RIGVEDA]” that the Rigveda consists of two distinct parts: an Old Rigveda and a New Rigveda. [While the two terms (Old Rigveda and New Rigveda) are mine, the division of the hymns of the Rigveda under these two headings is based on the classifications and analyses of prominent western AIT-supporting scholars like Oldenberg, Witzel and Proferes, with plenty of additional analysis by myself]:

https://talageri.blogspot.com/2022/08/final-version-of-chronological-gulf.html

As we saw, the word ratha in the Rigveda is found sweepingly present in every part of every Book of the Rigveda. This is because the word, originally referring to solid-wheeled vehicles, came to mean spoked-wheeled vehicles after these replaced the earlier ones as primary war vehicles. But, since the word ratha is found sweepingly present in every part of every Book of the Rigveda, it is not possible to demarcate the exact dividing line between the two sets of references.

But when, instead of examining general vehicle words, we examine the words which clearly demarcate this dividing line between the old era to the new era, it becomes clear that the old era represented solid-wheeled vehicles and the new era represented spoked-wheeled vehicles.

And it should be obvious that this cannot be done by examining the references to general wheel parts but by examining the references to the specific wheel part which represents the new spoked-wheeled era: i.e. spokes.    

Spokes (ara) are mentioned only in the New Rigveda:

V.13.6; 58.5.

 I.32.15; 141.9; 164.11,12,13,48.

VIII.20.14; 77.3.

X.78.4.

 

The transition from solid-wheeled vehicles to spoked-wheeled vehicles must definitely have resulted in noticeable changes in the Rigvedic culture. This is noticeable in many aspects of culture, and I have pointed them out in my above article (on the CHRONOLOGICAL GULF BETWEEN THE OLD RIGVEDA AND THE NEW RIGVEDA). But there are also specific changes directly to do with the change in vehicle type, in the birth of new genres of personal name types in the spoked-wheeled vehicle era.

Names with aśva and ratha appear among composer names as well as in references within the hymns themselves in the Rigveda only in the books of the New Rigveda, signifying a sudden sea-change in the importance of horses and new technology chariots in the period of the New Rigveda.

Names with aśva and ratha appear in the composer names of the following hymns:

 V.47, 52-61, 81-82 (13 hymns).

 I.100 (1 hymn).

 VIII. 14-15, 23-26, 35-38, 46 (11 hymns).

 IX.32, 101 (2 hymns).

 X.102, 103, 134 (3 hymns).

Likewise, names with aśva and ratha appear within the hymns of the Rigveda only in the books of the New Rigveda (and in one Redacted Hymn). They appear as follows:

IV.30.18 (Redacted Hymn).

V.27.4-6; 33.9; 36.6; 52.1; 61.5,10,18-19; 79.2 (6 hymns, 11 verses).

I.36.18; 100.16-17; 112.10,15; 116.6,16; 117.17,18; 122.7 (6 hymns, 10 verses).

VIII.1.30,32; 9.10; 23.16,23-24; 24.14,22-23,28-29; 26.9,11; 35.19-21; 36.7; 37.7; 38.8; 46.21,23; 68.15,16 (11 hymns, 23 verses).

IX.65.7 (1 hymn, 1 verse).

X.49.6; 60.5; 61.21 (3 hymns, 3 verses).

It is impossible to ignore, sidestep or stonewall the significance of these names appearing only in the New Rigveda but completely absent in the Old Rigveda..

 

The spoked-wheel chariot clearly originated after the different IE branches had separated from each other, since there is no common word for spokes in any two of the twelve branches.

Trippett puts it (in "The First Horsemen", Time-Life Books, 1974) as follows: "Just where the spoked-wheel originated no-one knows".

However, the Rigveda is the only text in the world which clearly shows a distinction between two chronological periods, an earlier period without spokes and a later period with spokes. Therefore, it is clear that the spoked wheel was invented in the Rigvedic period and within the Rigvedic geographical horizon, though not necessarily by the Pūrus (Vedic people).

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

HOCK 1999a: Out of India? The linguistic evidence. Hock, Hans H. pp.1-18, in “Aryan and non-Aryan in South Asia: evidence, interpretation, and ideology” (proceedings of the International Seminar on Aryan and non-Aryan in South Asia, Univ. of Michigan, October 1996).

KENOYER 2004: Wheeled Vehicles of the Indus Valley Civilization of Pakistan and India. Kenoyer J.M., pp.87-106, numbered 1-38, in Rad und Wagen: Der Ursprung einer Innovation Wagen in Vorderen Orient und Europa, edit. M. Fansa, S Burmeister, Mainz am Rhein, Verlagg, Philipp von Zabern. Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, 2004.

LUBOTSKY 2023: Indo-European and Indo-Iranian Wagon Terminology and the Date of the Indo-Iranian Split. Lubotsky, Alexander. Paper 15 in The Indo-European Puzzle Revisited, Cambridge University Press, 2023.

TRIPPETT 1974: The First Horsemen (The Emergence of Man). Trippett, Frank. Time-Life Books Publication, 1974.

WITZEL 2000a: The Languages of Harappa. Witzel, Michael. Feb. 17, 2000.