The Antiquities of Orissa v1.c10.461

v1.c10.461

**Snaffles:** The form of the bit is not perceptible, but rings are occasionally seen which suggest the idea of a snaffle; and the *Agni Purāṇa* recommends five different kinds of snaffles as the most appropriate. One of these is said to have been wavy (*gomūtra*), another, crooked (*kuṭila*), a third, twisted or plaited (*Veṇī*), the fourth, a chain of lotuses or rings (*Padmamaṇḍalamālā*), and the fifth, jointed (*garbhika*). These are very different from what Arrian describes in his *Indica*. He says, "The Indians have neither saddles nor bridles, like those which the Greeks and Celts make use of; but instead of bridles they bind a piece of raw bullock's hide round the lower part of the horse's jaws, to the inner part of which the common people fix spikes of brass or iron, not very sharp, but the richer ones have them of ivory. Within the horse's mouth is a piece of iron like a dart to which the reins are fastened".²³³ Commenting on this passage, Mr. Fergusson observes, "If this was the mode employed by the Indians in Alexander's time, they seem to have benefited by their intercourse with the West before the Sāñci sculptures were executed. If any one will compare the head stalls of the bridles represented in the plate (XXXIV) with figs. 6, 7 and 8 of Plate III, they will see how perfect the head gear of these horses had become".²³⁴ In the absence of positive proofs to the contrary, it is of course futile to question the statement of Arrian, or the accuracy of the deduction drawn from it; but it seems rather unaccountable, why the people, who guided their horses by putting an iron dart inside the mouth and tying the reins thereto, should put a spiked band on the nose? Not being attached to the reins, it could serve no useful purpose in checking the horse, and the idea, therefore, suggests itself that it was the martingale with its studded nose-piece which Arrian mistook for a substitute of the bit. As to the effect of Alexander’s transient visit, all we have to say is that, intercourse with Europeans for near three centuries, and a century of English domination, have not yet made the Hindustāni exchange his *cārjāmā* or pad for the wooden saddle. If it be impossible to suppose that the Indian Aryans had the capacity to design a bridle for their horses which they brought with them from the plateau of Central Asia, at least two thousand years before Christ, and used from time immemorial, and a model be really required for them to copy, the Assyrians or Persians were more likely to afford it than Alexander or his successors, the Greco-Bactrians. Looking at the caparisoned horses in Layard’s plates, and comparing them with similar figures in Khaṇḍagiri and Sāñci, one sees a great deal of similitude to form a conjecture; a close examination, however, brings to light many marked peculiarities which leave no room for doubt as to their origin being different. The mode of dressing the mane and forelock was also different. The Assyrians hacked the mane, or braided it. No Indian ever hacked the mane, but braiding was not unknown. In our days it is common enough. The Hindus dressed the forelock in the form of a flowing arching crest; the Assyrians tied it in three tiers or in three separate tufts. Some times the bulk of the forelock in India was increased by the addition of false hair, and the following passage from the *Vikramorvaśī* of Kālidāsa describes a yak-tail crest :