Katherine Griffis-Greenberg Wrote:
- But if the chariot drags you,
>
> ...which assumes you're somehow attached to it -
> such as holding the reins, lashed to it, etc.
> Tutankhamun while hunting would likely have not
> been lashed to his chariot.
No, you do not have to be attached to a cart to get dragged! All you have to do is have a piece of clothing get caught. Or your foot (I've seen that one a few times.)
> > or you get
> > pulled under wheels,
>
> The classic Egyptian chartiot has an open back:
> logistically, I'm trying to think how, if, for
> example, the chariot is moving north and you go
> south as you fall/tumble/are knocked out of the
> chariot that you can be "pulled under the wheels."
> Elaborate on a scenario so I can see what you
> mean.
You're forgetting momentum. You can go over the front if there's a sudden stop--the horses quit, or one trips, or one falls. All those things will send you flying.
Even though the chariots were light & had a woven floor for shock absorption, they still took a nasty jolt when they hit things. This still happens in a horse cart. Driving a simple 19th C cart, I can attest that you feel every single bump on the road. Sometimes you don't see things until it's too late, and then you hang on.
> > If you aren't stable--and in
> > Egyptian chariots, you really were'nt--you
> could
> > fly over the front, land on the yoke &
> then
> > get run over.
>
> That assumes a sudden stop where the horses come
> to a sudden halt and the chariot rams into their
> haunches, right? I could see that happening, but
> I would think a charioteer would attempt to veer
> the chariot to either side of the horses to avoid
> such a collision. There could be too much damage
> to both horses and chariot to recover from such an
> event, so I'm sure they worked out methods to move
> to either side of the horses in such a situation.
That's why you have a yoke. The horse can't come into contact with the chariot unless the yoke (on the chariot) or the harness (on the horse) breaks. Which happens, BTW.
Now a question--was there a reason that amputation wasn't attempted?
