Megaliths, Shamen & the City Builders – the hidden connections (cont.)
By Lucy Wyatt
There is a very good reason why the civilisers should want to make contact with the early Indo-Europeans. There was a certain something that the PIEs had for which the civilisers were keen to exchange skills and ideas. It was this certain something that I think establishes the PIEs in a distinct time and place and that something was the wild horse, the tarpan. The Indo-Europeans lived in the range of the tarpan.
Until the arrival of the civilisers, who knew how to genetically interfere with wild creatures for the benefit of humans, the tarpan had been of little use to the PIEs. The first domestic horse bones are usually claimed to be those dating from 4,000 BC found at the Dereivka site in the Sdreny Stog region of the Ukraine. The break-through in the exploitation of the deep steppe did not happen until about 3,500 BC, and the first wheeled carts did not appear on the steppes north of the Black Sea and Caspian before 3,000 BC.
The civilisers would have brought horses down from the Ukraine, and, although it was longer before they made an obvious impact on Mesopotamia, within a certain period of time there is evidence of their use here. By 2,800 BC 80% of Sumerians lived in cities and had wheeled carts.
The shift from wild to domestic horses had such an impact on the PIEs that they venerated the horse for thousands of years. They attributed God-like powers to them. Their attitude to religion was simple and nature based (Sky god/ earth mother). A term for religion can be reconstructed from ‘creed’ based on two words cre dhe, meaning “put into your heart”.
One concept that particularly demonstrates the impact of the civilisers and is inexplicable to linguists is the concept of ‘king’ (*reg) that can be reconstructed to the earliest level of proto-Indo-European language (rex/ raj/ reich). This is a remarkable concept as it underpins the rules/regulation/accuracy aspect of the archetype. But at the time they learnt this word the Indo-Europeans were wild warlike tribes living in mud huts where the central focus was the hearth. Linguists are forced to give the ridiculous explanation of two kings: one for war and one for ruling.(!?) Did the Indo-Europeans pick up a word that they did not understand the full meaning of?