Talk:Trundholm sun chariot

Drawing
drawing (PD or fairuse?) dab (&#5839;) 09:24, 10 August 2005 (UTC) the drawing shows the spirally patterns familiar from neolithic petroglyphs, identified as solar symbols, see . dab (&#5839;) 13:07, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Dating
how is the dating justified? It went down from 1400 to the 1200s? While I find a spoke-wheeled chariot in 1400 BC Scandinavia most amazing, I suppose there is nothing too surprising about 1000 BC sopoked wheels. So my surprise really rather hinges of the dating of this thing. dab (&#5839;) 11:48, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Here is a translation from Nationalencyklopedin:
 * Sacrificial find from the elder Bronze Age consisting of a 57 cm long model of a wagon harnessed with a horse, discovered in 1902 in the bog of Trundholm on NW Zealand, now in the National Museum in Copenhagen. T, which has been dated to 1300-1500 BC is made of cast bronze and consists of a circular disc measuring 25 cm across, on which parts of the original golden layer are preserved. The disc is mounted on a wagon harnessed with a horse, having six wheels, one of the oldest plastic representations from the Danish bronze age. It is believed that there was a wagon in natural size as well, which was used in solar worship.

I guess the dating is based on C12 dating, since it so vague.--Wiglaf 12:03, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

C14 you mean? You cannot date metal with that. The thing was just ploughed up in a field, so there is no burial to associate it with. I think it is just dated based on the style of workmanship, to the 'middle Nordic Bronze Age'. I wonder if it is significant that there is only one horse, as compared to two, in the King's Burial case. Is there no evidence of horse tacks, allowing to date the beginning of two-horse-teams? I have thought about Arvak and Alsvid, in this context. It makes precious little sense to have one horse who is an "early riser", if you have to wait for the other one to wake up before you can leave. I think that either were they two horses used for each direction of the trip (i.e. Arvak during the day, and Alsvid for the trip back during the night), or they were two epitheta for the single horse we can see here. Either way, the names would have been distributed on the team of two horses from 1000 BC or so when two-horse-teams became common (of course I am not implying that the actual Old Norse names are that old, they would have been different names, in pre-proto-Germanic). dab (&#5839;) 12:23, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Oops, yes C14. I assumed the wheels were made of wood. Concerning Alsvid and Arvak, the number of horses may have changed during the 2500 years that passed between the Trundholm wagon and the Edda. The relationship between the imagery of the Nordic Bronze Age and the Edda is a never-ending discussion in Scandinavia.--Wiglaf 12:28, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * of course, there are 2500 years between the Trundholm chariot and the Edda, after all. I was just speculating about when they went from one to two horses. Since the "King's Grave" already shows a team of two, you could imagine that this happened rather early. In any case, as long as there are no remains of any actual chariots, this is pure speculation. dab (&#5839;) 08:27, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, I wish we had more info. I also wish we had one of those petroglyph experts here. User:OlofE should have a lot to add. I'll e-mail him and see if he's interested.--Wiglaf 08:38, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I also strongly wish we had some more recent data on the subject. About dating. Is it not possible to do some chemical analysis on bronze itself or smth? Or is it done, then it would be nice to have data about publication of such. To put it brutally: is there any strong evidence that this horse was not manufactured in early 20th c and then buried there, as hoax? I'm interested bcs I work in little bronze age museum in Estonia and we have pic of this chariot here and some people ask about it. (Also we have copy of Egtved girl.) If you think it is not interesting for general public, I at least am very interested in more exact description of circumstances finding this thing. Chariot. BirgittaMTh (talk) 13:37, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 14:19, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Why is this rated Low-Importance?

Worth researching
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Varoon Arya (talk • contribs)
 * Sun-disks and women
 * The Sun, the chariot and the Indo-European tradition
 * Possible connections with Bronze Age Ireland

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Trundholm sun chariot. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927200826/http://www2.kah-bonn.de/1/33/0.htm to http://www2.kah-bonn.de/1/33/0.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927201252/http://www2.kah-bonn.de/pr/33/bronzezeit-pressemappe.doc to http://www2.kah-bonn.de/pr/33/bronzezeit-pressemappe.doc

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:24, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Featured picture scheduled for POTD
Hello! This is to let editors know that File:Solvognen-00100.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for September 5, 2022. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2022-09-05. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.9% of all FPs 11:52, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

As a calendar
Randsborg's research (https://www.rockartscandinavia.com/images/articles/randsborga9.pdf), which was the unreferenced source of the calendar claims I've removed, makes wild leaps of numerical imagination to match some created numbers from these types of objects to some other number related to astronomy. For example, for another similar object:

"Still, a numerical pattern does not seem to emerge. However, if one - in a lucky strike of imagination! - multiplies by the number of the factor of the zones, the sum of the spirals turns out to be 15x1+22x2+26x3+32x4 = 265, or exactly the number of days in 9 months of the Moon-year (265½), or, incidentally, also the length of the average human period of pregnancy."

For this object, he creates a framework where any number can be multiplied by any other number:

"Looking next at the numbers, contours of a mathematical system appears, including multiplication and likely division as well: 1 = 1x1, 8 = 2x2x2, 16 = 2x2x2x2; 27 = 3x3x3; 16 = 4x4; 25 = 5x5. Or, in other words, a system building on multiplication of the same number, 1x1, 1x1x1, 1x1x1x1, etc.; 2x2, 2x2x2, 2x2x2, etc.; 3x3, 3x3x3, etc.; 4x4, etc.; 5x5, etc.; and so on. One also notes multiplications of different numbers: 2x4, 5x4, and 3x9."

There are plenty of numbers in astronomy to pick from (even more if you start including mammalian gestation periods), and there are many ways of making numbers from depictions in objects. Once these are 'matched' they seem to have some significance in retrospect. But this is throwing a handful of darts at a dart board, them claiming the one near the bullseye was intentional. Even worse, it's claiming significance of a dart that didn't even hit a bullseye, but instead saying the double-7 it did hit is actually very significant because a dart hit it, therefore it must have been intentional, in an example of circular logic. Pygathrix nigripes (talk) 10:42, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Is that really a horse?
I admit I'm not familiar with horses, but It doesn't look much like a horse to me. The body is hardly thicker than the neck, and the body and neck together have an almost snake-like appearance. The head is a little long and has a curious droop. Is it just highly stylized? Or is there a breed of horses that look like this? Or is there some other animal that he could have had in mind? UBJ 43X (talk) 00:36, 31 May 2024 (UTC)