Word

ISSN: 0043-7956 (Print) 2373-5112 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rwrd20

The Indo-European horse: A linguistic

reconstruction

Adrian Parvulescu

To cite this article: Adrian Parvulescu (1993) The Indo-European horse: A linguistic
reconstruction, Word, 44:1, 69-76, DOI: 10.1080/00437956.1993.11435895

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1993.11435895

Published online: 16 Jun 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 430

View related articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rwrd20
ADRIANPARVULESCU----------------------

The Indo-European horse:

A linguistic reconstruction

Abstract. Archaeologically reconstructed, the IE horse was a rela-

tively small animal, used for food or as sacrificial victim and domesti-
cated around 4000 B.C. in the Sredni Stog culture in southern Ukraine.
Initially kept for horseback riding, the horse was used much later,
around 2300 B.C., for the traction of light-vehicles. Linguistic investi-
gation adds new details to this description. Although the etymology of
the IE root for horse *ekuo- is unknown, one can assume that it denoted
a 'work-horse,' not only' because most of the words for 'horse' derive
from terms designating 'pack- or draft-horses' (Lat. caballus, NHG
Pferd, Lith. arklys), but also because two of its cognates mean 'ass'
(Arm. es) and 'mule' (Gaul. Epona), which could take place only when
their common source has the meaning 'work-horse' or 'work-animal', as
in the case of Lat. sagmarius, Gk. hypozygia, etc. IE *ekuo- most
probably also denoted a gelding. '

Of late, there has been renewed interest in the IE horse. Archae-

ological excavations throughout Europe and Asia have revealed more
data about the origin, domestication and dispersion of the primitive
horse. It is now an established fact that the medium-size horse of the
Pleistocene survived the Ice Age, that from it originated the Eurasian
primitive horse of relatively small-size, with an average withers height
of 136 em., and that its last descendant in Europe was the wild tarpan
and in Central Asia the so-called Przevalsky horse (Bakony 1974:
230-236). To the question of when and where the primitive horse was
first domesticated, archaeologists have been able to give us a positive
answer: in the Dereivka/Sredni Stog complex on the Middle Dnieper in
southern Ukraine around 4000 B.C. (Mallory 1981: 215; Anthony
1986: 295, 303-304; Anthony and Brown 1990). Situated at the south-
east end of an area increasingly referred to by archaeologists as the PIE
homeland, the Sredni Stog culture flourished around the end of the 5th
millenium B.C. and the beginning of the 4th millenium B.C. The
domestication of the horse certainly played a major role in the expan-
sion of the Dnieper-Donets cultures. Although archaeologically we
witness around 3300 B.C. the most far-reaching event in the yet young
PIE civilization, i.e. the appearance of wheeled vehicles (Anthony

69
70 WORD, VOLUME 44, NUMBER I (APRIL, 1993)

1986: 303), the horse has no bearing on it. Too heavy for primitive
horse-traction, these wagons with heavy block wheels were most prob-
ably drawn by oxen in the opinion of archaeologists. One has to wait
until around 2300 B.C. in order to see horses pulling light vehicles
with either spoked- or cross-bar wheels (Mallory 1981:215-216). But
by that time the dispersal of the PIE unity had already taken place and,
along with the new civilization centers, the presumed original unique
language of the common homeland split into several branches.
Since we have the remains of the domesticated horse, a natural
question would arise: do we know the name of this horse in the PIE
language? It is a known fact that most of the IE languages, with the
notable exception of the Slavic languages, share a common root for
'horse,' *ek11.o-. Does this root refer to the wild primitive IE horse or
to the domesticated IE horse?
In order to answer this question, we should first note that there is
a difference between wild and domesticated animal-names. Usually,
wild animals have only one name, enough for the entire species, such
as bear, wolf, fox, beaver, etc. The sex is indicated by normal gender
marks but not by different roots. There are a few exceptions: duck vs.
drake, goose vs. gander, hind vs. stag, etc.
In a totally different situation are the names of the domesticated
animals. Used by humans for economic needs, domestic animals are
subjected to biological interventions, the most important one being
castration. Thus, the animal's natural condition is changed in order to
be adapted to human economic aims. One can mention, for example,
the series:
sheep - ram - wether (castrated ram) - ewe
swine- boar- barrow (castrated boar) - sow
But the most significant example is the terminology of the bovine
genus:
cattle - bull - ox (castrated bull) - cow
Although not visible at first glance, the main reason behind the use of
these terms is economic. Primitively, cattle denoted quadrupeds serv-
ing for agricultural or transportation purposes: horses, asses, sheep,
camels and goats (OED 2.189-190 s.v.). Later, cattle restricted its
semantic field to beasts of the bovine genus. However, as is well-
known, the ultimate origin of this term is in Lat. capitale 'large amount
of money, capital.' The animals were simply considered to be a certain
form of property, 'movable property,' to use Benveniste's terminology
 PARVULESCU: IE HORSE 71

(e.g. Benveniste 1973: 43, 49, etc.). One can offer many similar cases:
Sp. ganar 'to gain' > ganado 'cattle,' OE neotan 'to obtain' > neat
'cattle,' OSw. boskap 'goods, property' > Sw. boskap 'cattle' etc.
The other members of the cattle family show the same economic
function: the bull is the animal kept only for reproduction, the ox, the
castrated male, is in fact the draft-animal, and, finally, the cow is
inexorably related to the idea of producing milk. Both ox and cow are
also viewed as meat sources. Thus, each category is the reflex of a
specific economic function.
If we look at 'horse' now, essentially we will find the same
divisions: the stallion, the male horse used for reproduction, the mare,
the female horse, mostly kept in stables and rarely put to work during
pregnancy, the gelding, the castrated horse, a descriptive term rarely
used as such, and the horse, the generic term, used for wild as well as
domesticated animals. If stallion, mare and gelding refer to a specific
economic or biologic aspect, then what does horse (domesticated) refer
to? The answer is simple: horse designates a member of the equid family
performing one of the following works: riding (saddle-horse), carrying
burdens (pack-horse) and pulling carts or chariots (draft-horse). In
brief, horse means work-horse.
There are several examples that substantiate the idea that words
for 'horse' etymologically derive from terms designating the 'work-
horse,' the 'nag,' the cheap horse used for hard labor and chores, not
the horse of good breed, the horse well-kept for leisure, nor the race-
horse specially selected and trained, which bears peculiar names, such
as the thoroughbred, etc.
One should start with Lat. caballus 'horse,' first occurring in Latin
in the 2nd century B.C. About eight centuries later it supplanted equus
and became the generic term for 'horse' in Latin and the Romance
languages as well (Walde/Hofmann 1.125-126, 853; FEW 2.8-12).
Caballus most probably entered Latin from Greek, where one may find
a form kaballeion in inscriptions of the 4th century B.C. in Ionia (Robert
1939: 179). The origin of the Greek word is much disputed (Kretschmer
1928: 191; Gregoire 1938: 287-288; Nehring 1949: 165-170), but we
do know the kind of horse the Greek word denotes: a gloss explains it
as ergates hippos (Hesych) 'work-horse.' On the other hand, several
sources claim caballus to be a 'gelding': cabonem equum castratum,
quem nos caballum dicimus "cabo, a castrated horse, that we call
caballus" (CGL V 21, see ThLL 3.3 s. v.). It must be said that castration
and work go together as far as domesticated animals are concerned.
Castration makes the animal tamer, easier to handle, and more fit for
72 WORD, VOLUME 44, NUMBER 1 (APRIL, 1993)

work. One will certainly remember the fact that oxen are castrated in
order to make them more docile for hard labor, the bull being notori-
ously ill-tempered and very little manageable for steady work. As for
the horse, we have a similar report written by Varro in the 1st century
B.C. in his agricultural textbook De re rustica 2. 7. 15: in viis habere
malunt placidos equos, propter quod discrimen maxime institutum, ut
castrentur equi; demptis enim testiculis fiunt quietiores ''they (military
men) prefer to have for road service mild horses; therefore, they in-
stituted the custom of castrating the horses, which become more docile
if they have the testicles cut off.'' Whereas gelding was customary for
draft- or pack-horses, the horses used for riding by the army could have
also been entires (Hyland 1990: 80-81). Thus, gelding was a distinctive
mark of the draft- and pack-horses.
Another example to illustrate the fact that the notion of 'horse'
derives from the idea of 'work-horse' is NHG Pferd. This term derives
from Medieval Latin paraveredus 'post-horse,' which is a curious
blend of a Greek preposition para 'by' and a Celtic compound veredus
'cart-horse'< ve 'by' and reda 'cart, chariot' (FEW 7.640-641 s.v.).
The horse referred to here is the one used in a relay or station on the
lines of the postal service. Again, the most commonly used type of
horse has become the symbol of the species.
If we add to this list Lith. arklys 'horse,' a derivative of ark/as
'plow'(< arti 'to plow,' Fraenkel1962: 1.16) or NHG Gaul 'nag,' but
'horse' in some dialects, it will be obvious that in the majority of the
cases where we know the etymology or the primitive meaning, 'horse'
denoted originally the low-price horse, the work-horse.
On the other hand, one can see from other examples that 'work-
horse' is actually a special case of the more general idea of 'work-
animal.' This makes it possible that other animals derive their names
from the same term, not only 'horse.' It will be seen from the follow-
ing cases that numerous times 'horse,' as well as the other members of
the equid family, 'ass' and 'mule', originate in a common root desig-
nating the 'work-animal.' Thus, from Gk. stigma 'pack-saddle,' Later
Latin developed an adjective sagmarius 'belonging to a pack-saddle'
which was applied to either horses (equus sagmarius) or mules (mulus
sagmarius). Used as a noun, sagmarius spread rapidly throughout
Europe denoting either generally a beast of burden or a pack-horse (OE
seamere, NE sumpter, OFr. somier) or members of the equid genus
utilized for carrying burdens, such as the jackass (MFr. sommiere,
Dial.Fr. saumiret, It. somaro) or the mule (OE seamere, OHG sau-
mari, Fr. sommier) (FEW 11.68-71 s.v. [Hubschmid]).
Similar semantic developments can be seen in the case of Lat.
 PARVULESCU: IE HORSE 73

iumenta lit. 'beasts for the yoke,' that includes horse, donkey, mule
and camel. In the Romance languages iumentum narrowed its meaning
to 'mare' for most of the French area (jument) and 'mule' or 'ass' for
the rest of Romania (FEW 5.63-64). We should also mention the
Greek counterpart of iumenta, i.e. hypozygia, denoting also 'beasts for
the yoke' (oxen, cows, mules, horses), which by the time of the
Septuaginta, 3rd century B. C., had restricted its meaning to 'ass'. To
the same category belong ON eykr, Nice. eykur, NSw. ok 'draft-
animal, horse,' all from Proto-Norse *jaukiz 'yoke-animal' = Skt.
y6gya 'draft-animal' = Lith. jautis 'ox' = Toch.A yuk 'horse'. We
must also add to this list Lat. cantherius 'gelding' (2nd century B.C.),
later 'ass, mule' (2nd century A.D.), a loan from Gk. kanthelios
'pack-ass,' the latter being identical with kanthelia n.pl. 'panniers at
the sides of a pack-saddle, pack-saddle.' Finally, one may mention
Lat. burrus 'red' (> Dial.Sp. burru 'horse') > burricus 'small horse'
>Fr. bourrique 'she-ass,' It. brico 'ass, mule, old horse,' Sp. borrico
'ass,' > burro 'id.' (> Engl. burro 'donkey').
As was pointed out above, these examples teach us a very useful
lesson. The fact that horse, ass and mule could derive their names from
a common root demonstrates that, in the eyes of the people, the mem-
bers of the equid family are perceived as similar in shape and biolog-
ical characteristics. The names of the horse, ass and mule became in
certain cases interchangeable. But there is a strong historical difference
between horse and ass: the latter is a late-comer in IE civilization. First
domesticated in southern Egypt in the 4th millenium B.C., the ass
quickly spread to the Near East, reaching Palestine around 3/000 B.C.,
Asia Minor around 11700 B.C., and Europe and southern Ukraine
around 900 B.C. (Bokonyi 1974: 297-308). Similar in size and
strength to the horse, the donkey and the mule have an exceptional
capacity for work. They were used for certain labors with more success
than the horse, which explains why words for 'work-horse' may also
denote 'donkey' or 'mule.'
The above discussion will help us considerably in the analysis of
the IE root for 'horse,' *ekl!.,o-. The vast majority of the cognates of
this root do mean 'horse': Skt. asva, Av. aspa, Gk. hippos, Lat.
equus, etc. But two of them mean 'mule' and 'ass.' First, the Celtic
stem epo- appears also in the name of the important Gaulish goddess
Epona, who is in fact a protectress of the mules. A scholiast (ad Juv.
8.155-157) said: Epona dea mulionum est "Epona is the goddess of
the mule-drivers.'' What is more, many literary and religious texts
from the first centuries A.D. connect the goddess with the ass, asinus,
not the horse (see RE 6.229 s.v.).
74 WORD, VOLUME 44, NUMBER I (APRIL, 1993)

The second case is that of Arm. es 'ass,' which long ago had been
derived from *ekuo- by Pedersen (1905: 205: 1906: 404). This idea is
no longer considered nowadays. There are two objections against it,
summarized by Greppin (1984: 92,94): 1. The initial long e in es
would point to an original IE *ei, not *e as in *ekuo-; and 2. The
semantic discrepancy between 'horse' and 'ass' would drop Arm. es
from a possible connection.
With regard to the first objection, it must be said that Gk. hippos
together with dialectal fkkos and Myc. i-qo- or i-po- also indicate a
different vowel than the expected e, without need for this reason to
exclude them from the root *ekuo-. Moreover, Pedersen (1905: 205;
1906: 404) gave a satisfactory explanation, according to which Arm.
es, gen. isoy, as well as me] 'middle,' gen. mijoy, actually show a
phonetic phenomenon: the development of a diphthong before the
affricates j ( < di < IE *dhi), c (IE *ti) and c (IE *di). The diph-
thong was reduced in the genitiv"e to *e > Arm. i. In some cases the
nominative and the genitive have been leveled: ii 'viper', gen. iii for
*ez: iii. Thus, Arm. es instead of the expected *is appears to be the
result of a rule of Armenian phonology.
As for the objection regarding the semantic discrepancy between
'horse' and 'ass', one could see above many similar cases where both
'horse' and 'ass' are semantic developments of a root meaning 'pack-
or draft-animal.' Thus Gaul. Epona, as well as Arm. es, demonstrate
that IE *ekuo- denoted a 'work-animal' or a 'work-horse.'
If all this is correct, then an assumption can be made with re-
gard to the chronology of the root. Since *ekuo- designated a 'work-
horse' and since horse-drawn vehicles do not appear before 2300 B.C.,
it follows that the occurrence of *ekuo- must be placed somewhere
around this date. Also a late date can be inferred, as Professor W.
Lehmann kindly pointed out to me, from the fact that -o- and -a- stems
appear to be late developments in IE, as F. Specht has argued (1944:
1-9). Consequently, one can draw the conclusion that *ekuo- most
probably did not apply to the domesticated horses from Dereivka/
Sredni Stog because they go back to 4000 B.C. Also, it must be said
that the etymology of *ekuo- cannot help this matter in any way. The
interpretations advanced Aso far (see Walde/Hofmann 1938-1956:
1.412, Frisk 1960: 1.733-735), of which the main one considers
*ekuo- related to *oku- 'quick' (first formulated by Vanicek and lately
tried again by Hamp 1990: 211-226), lack an archaeological, eco-
nomic, historical and linguistic perspective.
One last question remains: the castration of the pack- or draft-
 PARVULESCU: IE HORSE 75

horse. Castration of domesticated animals is a universal practice today.

Race-horses, draft-horses, donkeys, mules, even camels are no excep-
tions (Braider 1973: 149-150; Daumas 1968: 171-173). But for the
ancient Mediterranean world this may not be the case. In Homer horses
were used in war, in games, for occasional travels, but not for hard
labor. Oxen and mules were utilized as plow- or draft-animals and
consequently they are on the list of castrated animals given by Hesiod
in Works and Days 785-791. However, in the presumed IE homeland
in southern Ukraine there were no asses or mules according to Hero-
dotus (IV 27, 192) and archaeological evidence (Bokony 1974: 300).
The famous Greek historian appears to be very reliable with regard to
the information he dispenses about this area, because one of his con-
tentions, that Scythian wild horses were white in color, has been
confirmed by modern scholarship (Bokony 1974: 234). In the absence
of asses and mules, oxen were used as pack- and draft-animals in
southern Ukraine (Herodotus IV 69). There are also several reports by
ancient sources claiming that populations of that area used to castrate
their horses. In the first century A.D., Strabo writes about this fact
(7 .4.8 312): "It is customary for the entire population of Scythians and
Sarmatians to geld their horses in order to make them docile" (to tous
hfppous ektemnein eupeitheias khtirin). This information was con-
firmed four centuries later by Ammianus Marcellinus (Res gestae
17 .12.1-2) who, referring to the Sarmatian and Quaedi exiles raiding
Pannonia and Moesia, noted again the fact that their horses were
castrated: equorum plurimi . . . castrati ''most of their horses are
castrated." The Scythians settled in the area of southern Ukraine in the
8th century B.C. Did they bring with them the custom of gelding their
horses or did they learn it in their new homeland? If we remember that
the domestication of horses had started there, the second hypothesis
seems more plausible.
Although archaeology has provided us with a good picture of the
IE horse, linguistic research alone has been able to shed light on details
which are archaeologically hardly detectable. It becomes obvious
again that for IE studies a close cooperation between archaeology and
linguistics is complementary and indispensable.

Department of Classics
Montclair State College
Upper Montclair, NJ 07043
76 WORD, VOLUME 44, NUMBER I (APRIL, 1993)

REFERENCES

Anthony, David W. 1986. "The 'Kurgan culture,' Indo-European origins, and the domestication
of the horse: A reconsideration,'' Current anthropology 27:291-313.
Anthony, David W. and Dorcas R. Brown. 1991. "The origin of horseback riding," Antiquity
65(246):22-38.
Benveniste, Emile 1973. Indo-European language and society. Trans!. E. Palmer. London: Faber
and Faber.
Bokony, Sandor. 1974. History of domestic mammals in Central and Eastern Europe. Budapest:
Akademiai Kiad6.
- - - . 1978. "The earliest waves of domestic horses in East Europe." Journal of Indo-
European Studies 6:17-76.
Braider, Donald 1973. The life, history and magic of the horse. New York: Grosset and Dunlap.
CGL = Corpus glossariorum latinorum. Lipsiae 1888, vols. 1-V.
Daumas, Melchior J.E. 1968. Horses of the Sahara. Austin and London: University of Texas.
FEW = Walther von Wartburg, Franzosisches etymologisches Worterbuch. Bonn: Fritz Klopp
Verlag, 1922-1928; Leipzig: B.G. Teubner, 1932-1940; Basel: Zbinden Verlag, 1952-
1965.
Fraenkel, Ernest. 1955. Litauisches etymologisches Worterbuch. Heidelberg and Gottingen,
Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht.
Frisk, Hjalmar 1960. Griechisches etymologisches Worterbuch. Heidelberg, C. Winter, vols.
1-3.
Gregoire, Henri. 1938. "Caballus = kobalos, kabelos et onus = onos." Byzantion 13:287-290.
Greppin, John A.C. 1984. "Arm. sun 'dog' and the passage of IE *kw to Arm. S" Annual of
Armenian linguistics 5:91-97.
Hamp, Eric P. 1990. "The Indo-European horse." When worlds collide. Indo-Europeans and
Pre-Indo-Europeans. The Bellagio papers. Ed. by Thomas L. Markey and John A.C.
Greppin. Ann Arbor: Karoma. Pp. 211-26.
Hyland, Ann. 1990. Equus: the horse in the Roman world. London: B.T. Batsford.
Mallory, James P. 1981. "The ritual treatment of the horse in the early Kurgan tradition."
Journal of Indo-European Studies 9:205-26.
Nehring, Alfons. 1949. "Die Wortsippe von gr. kaballes." Die Sprache 1:165-70.
OED = Oxford English Dictionary
Pedersen, Holger. 1905. "Zur armenischen Sprachgeschichte" Zeitschrift fiir vergleichende
Sprachforschung 38:194-240.
- - - . 1906. "Arrnenisch und die Nachbarsprachen" Zeitschriftfiir vergleichende Sparclifor-
schung 39:334-484.
RE = Paulys Real-Encyklopiidie der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft. Hrsg. G. Wissowa und
W. Kroll. Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler.
Robert, Louis. 1939. "Hellenica." Revue de philologie 13:174-79.
Specht, Franz. 1944. Der Ursprung der indogermanischen Deklination. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck
und Ruprecht.
ThLL = Thesaurus linguae latinae
Vanicek, Alois. 1877. Griechisch-lateinisches etymologisches Worterbuch. Leipzig: B.G. Teub-
ner.
Walde/Hofmann = Alois Walde. 1938-1956. Lateinisches etymologisches Worterbuch 1-3.
Neubearbeitete Auflage von J.B. Hofmann. Heidelberg: C. Winter.