A place for horse related questions

[Brian G Turner]

Hm ... I'm wondering now if perhaps I should use "pack mules" instead of "baggage ponies". Or are mules going to act similar in terms of being led?

I might have to go meet me some mules!!

 

[Kylara]

Mules will act exactly the same...they are just cross bred ponies...pack mules and baggage ponies both do the same things really...

ps Montero I'll come to your questions tomorrow - I am well behind on my sleep!

 

[Brian G Turner]

Ok, cheers, Kylara.

 

[Peter Graham]

And do you know anything about mules? Just curious as they were the pack animal of choice in the British Army in India (Rudyard Kipling sort of info).

I'm not Kylara, but a mule is a cross breed. What we call mules today were traditionally a cross breed of a donkey and a horse, but the word has much wider meaning. Many sheep are called mules, and it simply means a cross between two pure breeds - round here it's often Texel rams crossed with Blue Faced Leicester ewes to produce large, resilient, upland sheep with a solid amount of meat on them.

The children of Indian wives and East India Company men were called "mulattos" - same word.

My understanding is that baggage animals in the middle ages tended to be ponies. The small, stocky, hairy upland breeds are perfect for this sort of work and much of rural Northern England is still criss crossed with the pony routes.

Regards,

Peter

 

[Gumboot]

I'm not Kylara, but a mule is a cross breed. What we call mules today were traditionally a cross breed of a donkey and a horse, but the word has much wider meaning. Many sheep are called mules, and it simply means a cross between two pure breeds - round here it's often Texel rams crossed with Blue Faced Leicester ewes to produce large, resilient, upland sheep with a solid amount of meat on them.

The term "mule" was historically quite specific (offspring of a he-ass and a mare, as opposed to the offspring of a she-ass and a stallion, which was called a "hinny"). It was only much more recently that it came to be used by way of allusion for any sort of hybrid.

My understanding is that baggage animals in the middle ages tended to be ponies. The small, stocky, hairy upland breeds are perfect for this sort of work and much of rural Northern England is still criss crossed with the pony routes.

That's probably impossible to guess as the distinction between horses and ponies wasn't made until the 17th Century. In medieval times horses were defined by their use. "Packhorse" could refer to a horse, pony, donkey or mule. I think if writing a medieval setting you could get away with any of those animals as a pack animal, although it's worth considering that a mule offers a number of significant benefits over a horse, particularly its endurance and lower food needs for a given size.

 

[Kissmequick]

Native ponies have incredible endurance and are notoriously 'good-doers' (they thrive on little food - in fact these days keeping their weight down can be a problem!)

Ofc have an added advantage that you can use your pony to make more ponies with only the addition of another pony of the appropriate sex!

I suspect there was a good mix of native ponies and mules used for the purpose of freight - iirc mules weren't as popular in Britain in medieval times, perhaps because of an abundance of native ponies. So perhaps it depends on your terrain, whether there are ponies in abundance, plus social status (at times mules were the preferred ride for a gentleman) etc.

 

[Montero]

Regarding ponies and horses. I have a little tag in the back of my head that says that broadly speaking horses tend to be more likely to be gentlemanly, and ponies are more likely to be full of cunning and opinions of their own. Anything to it?

And Mules - the Rudyard Kipling I was thinking of is this:

Screw-Gun Mules
As me and my companions were scrambling up a hill,
The path was lost in rolling stones, but we went forward still;
For we can wriggle and climb, my lads, an turn up everywhere
And it's our delight on a mountain height, with a leg or two to spare!

Good luck to every sergeant, then, that lets us pick our road:
Bad luck to all the driver-men that cannot pack a load!
For we can wriggle and climb, my lads, and turn up everywhere,
And it's our delight on a mountain height, with a leg or two to spare!

 

[Kylara]

Well ponies tend to be a little more mischievious and cunning, the smaller they go the more character they have, however, horses are a little bogger and can't prance around quite so easily and tend to be less mischieviously cunning than their smaller counterparts. It doesn't mean that you don't get slightly more boisterous horses and slightly more buffoonish ponies though. I think ponies have the advantage of the smaller size and lower center of gravity so they can muck about a little more - I know my little Rizzo (22 now and retired) is only 11 hands and is constantly striving to be houdini, even with sheep wire and electric wire and enjoys acting like a little colt every now and then, whereas some of the bigger horses I have looked after are much easier to handle than my little man

 

[Montero]

Thanks

And thanks for all you are putting into this.

By the way, have you read Lois McMaster Bujold's The Paladin of Souls. I think horses and riders are done rather well in that. (Best to read Curse of Chalion first, but not essential. P of S continues the story of one of the secondary characters of C of C).

 

[Cavalry]

May I join this interesting little group?
I own( 2 ) ride ( Dressage and tent pegging). I am used to handle weapons on horseback ( have ridden for team GB in skill at arms, swords, lances and guns) as well as know a fair bit about mounted combat and horses in the military. Also trying to write a novel around a character involed in equestrian...Horses and riding are done so badly in most fiction as well as Fantasy etc -
Have been out of circulation for a while as I had a very bad accident - yes riding. Back now and happy to help advise but not tread on toes

 

[Kylara]

Haha sure, come right on in! Ah yes, the two most dangerous sports are: riding and rugby...

Dressage is wonderful, but only if your horse enjoys it, and my last boy was very much, yes yes now where are the jumps! He was so bad - he'd see a couple of poles in a school or field and would be absolutely useless at anything else!

My major goal, once the bf and I have gathered enough moneys is to build a nice awesome yard, which is so amazing that if you want plans I have them! Where I can bring on 4/5 yr olds under 14hh for kids/mounted games, other small people hehehe and I will grab myself a gorgeous appaloosa foal and my bf a freisian foal (he currently wants a 'not a shire, but big and powerful and ridey and fast and that jumps' - to which all his choices are totally inadequate (plus I do love freisians!) that I can brnig up and train to my desire and play with

Wow got a little carried away there!

But yes, this was started up because of the annoyances I got from books with equestrian elements in...and by equestrian I mean they had magical horses that galloped for days with no food...hehehe so Cavalry feel free to join in and help us make fiction a horseyer place!

 

[Montero]

I own( 2 ) ride ( Dressage and tent pegging). I am used to handle weapons on horseback ( have ridden for team GB in skill at arms, swords, lances and guns) as well as know a fair bit about mounted combat and horses in the military.

By any chance did you ride for "The Troop"? Saw them in action once at Battle Abbey, doing Roman period with the Ermine Street Guard. Finished with riding down a long line of mats laid over the turf, with a lance with a big pad on the end. Brave armoured soldier stood there and was taken in the chest by the padded lance and went flying back some feet.

I used to do English Civil War re-enactment (infantry). I did enough reading to know that the cavalry tactics of the period including what I think was called a caracole (could have that wrong). Anyway, ride in open formation towards infantry, fire horse pistol into front rank as you turn 180, ride away in open formation, reload, return, repeat. However in the re-enactment it was all sword work (which did also happen in 17th century) because no-one had succeeded in training their horse to have a pistol fired from on board.

There was a small muster once where a cavalry guy thought he'd got his horse trained to have a pistol fired from on board. Worked OK in a quiet field apparently, but once you added infantry to the excitement, the second the pistol was fired the horse was off across the field "boing, boing" with the rider just about staying on board.

So any info you feel like sharing about training horses to cope with firearms would be most interesting.

Also, is it true that one of the things that cavalry have to be careful not to do, is cut off their horses ears?

 

[elwagner]

Nice to see a thread on this. I did a blog entry a while back on horses in fantasy, but I covered fewer things a lot more superficially. Lots of inadvertent "horse abuse" in fantasy.

 

[Peter Graham]

Lots of inadvertent "horse abuse" in fantasy.

Absolutely. But also masses of general historical abuse, be it about architecture, kingship, social cohesion, town planning, food and drink, social mores, language etc etc.

OK - one can argue that all bets are off in fantasy and that anything goes, but to my mind, a good fantasy world has to be believable - and that tends to mean "recognisable". Fantasy horses have to act sufficiently like real world horses to ensure that readers suspend their disbelief (although see Shadowfax for a good example of how disbelief in the vast majority of readers can still be suspended despite a complete lack of verisimilitude). Worlds...erm... based on the European middle ages should ideally be sufficiently like real European states if you want to convince readers to swallow the magic, dragons, goblins et al.

So, I'm all for folk getting their horses right, But it doesn't end there.

Regards,

Peter

 

[Montero]

@Peter G

Couldn't agree more. Hear, hear.

I could go on at great length about all the writers who get it wrong. Instead I will give honourable mention to four who have got it right.

Lois McMaster Bujold, Barbara Hambly, Juliet McKenna and Anne Lyle.

 

[Cavalry]

Haha sure, come right on in! Ah yes, the two most dangerous sports are: riding and rugby...

Dressage is wonderful, but only if your horse enjoys it, and my last boy was very much, yes yes now where are the jumps! He was so bad - he'd see a couple of poles in a school or field and would be absolutely useless at anything else!

My major goal, once the bf and I have gathered enough moneys is to build a nice awesome yard, which is so amazing that if you want plans I have them! Where I can bring on 4/5 yr olds under 14hh for kids/mounted games, other small people hehehe and I will grab myself a gorgeous appaloosa foal and my bf a freisian foal (he currently wants a 'not a shire, but big and powerful and ridey and fast and that jumps' - to which all his choices are totally inadequate (plus I do love freisians!) that I can brnig up and train to my desire and play with

Wow got a little carried away there!

But yes, this was started up because of the annoyances I got from books with equestrian elements in...and by equestrian I mean they had magical horses that galloped for days with no food...hehehe so Cavalry feel free to join in and help us make fiction a horseyer place!

Agree on the Dressage - the horse has to want to be there.



Fresians are real nice and used in a lot of Fantasy films - best riding recently I have seen in a fantasy film is that chase to the fords in LOTR. My next horse will probaly be a Lusitano. I have a West F XTB 17hh mare and a Han 16.3hh Gelding at the moment.

 

[Cavalry]

By any chance did you ride for "The Troop"? Saw them in action once at Battle Abbey, doing Roman period with the Ermine Street Guard. Finished with riding down a long line of mats laid over the turf, with a lance with a big pad on the end. Brave armoured soldier stood there and was taken in the chest by the padded lance and went flying back some feet.

I used to do English Civil War re-enactment (infantry). I did enough reading to know that the cavalry tactics of the period including what I think was called a caracole (could have that wrong). Anyway, ride in open formation towards infantry, fire horse pistol into front rank as you turn 180, ride away in open formation, reload, return, repeat. However in the re-enactment it was all sword work (which did also happen in 17th century) because no-one had succeeded in training their horse to have a pistol fired from on board.

There was a small muster once where a cavalry guy thought he'd got his horse trained to have a pistol fired from on board. Worked OK in a quiet field apparently, but once you added infantry to the excitement, the second the pistol was fired the horse was off across the field "boing, boing" with the rider just about staying on board.

So any info you feel like sharing about training horses to cope with firearms would be most interesting.

Also, is it true that one of the things that cavalry have to be careful not to do, is cut off their horses ears?

Caracole - yes you are right - shoot em up a bit first. In all of history cavalry rarely took on steady formed infantry - especially with Pikes as in ECW. Yes I have ridden there but the best was the 100 horse charge against the shield wall ( yes steady infantry but the Normans were desperate by that stage) at the Battle of Hastings a few years ago - 2 ranks 50 wide, I carried the banner with the King ... I was in SK years ago as well I have trained about 4 horses to accept the gun - shooting while going over a jump...

PLUS I have a lot of horse action in my fantasy book which has dragged on for years.

 

[Boneman]

Haha sure, come right on in! Ah yes, the two most dangerous sports are: riding and rugby...

Actually, there are more deaths and eyes lost caused by fishing, than any other sport, so it could be said to be the most dangerous sport. Isn't it great that the cavalry have arrived at this thread?

 

[Gumboot]

Absolutely. But also masses of general historical abuse, be it about architecture, kingship, social cohesion, town planning, food and drink, social mores, language etc etc.

OK - one can argue that all bets are off in fantasy and that anything goes, but to my mind, a good fantasy world has to be believable - and that tends to mean "recognisable". Fantasy horses have to act sufficiently like real world horses to ensure that readers suspend their disbelief (although see Shadowfax for a good example of how disbelief in the vast majority of readers can still be suspended despite a complete lack of verisimilitude). Worlds...erm... based on the European middle ages should ideally be sufficiently like real European states if you want to convince readers to swallow the magic, dragons, goblins et al.

So, I'm all for folk getting their horses right, But it doesn't end there.

The problem is there's two different traps the historically educated fantasy author can fall into, which will ruin their story.

A) Reader expectation - when it come to any specialist area, often the actual facts and general public knowledge are leagues apart, and this is very true of Medieval Europe. Your reader has a perception of what medieval europe was like, and to maintain suspension of disbelief you have to write to that perception, even if it doesn't align with reality. The number of myths and misconceptions that abound about medieval europe is just astonishing.

B) Reader empathy - ultimately you need your reader to feel empathy for your characters, otherwise the entire story falls apart. It won't matter how realistically the setting is realised. The problem is, actual historical people from different periods had quite dramatically different values to us. Reproducing those values authentically may drive a wedge between your characters and your reader. Sexism, racism, and religious bigotry have all been standard for many human cultures. Even the innocent good-natured medieval hero is going to be sexist, racist, ethnocentric, intolerant of other religions, and generally awful to a modern reader.

So in order to maintain empathy we have to fudge social values somewhat.

 

[elwagner]

...one can argue that all bets are off in fantasy and that anything goes, but to my mind, a good fantasy world has to be believable - and that tends to mean "recognisable". Fantasy horses have to act sufficiently like real world horses to ensure that readers suspend their disbelief (although see Shadowfax for a good example of how disbelief in the vast majority of readers can still be suspended despite a complete lack of verisimilitude).

Well, Shadowfax was supposed to be descended from some fantastic beast who knew the speech of men. "Wise beasts" of one kind or another are a common enough trope in fantasy, as are magical horses. If someone is borrowing from a recognizable tradition, readers tend to be more accepting.

But I agree that if the horses in question are supposed to be ordinary, non-enchanted horses, then galloping for hours on end or crossing a desert with no oases and subsisting on only a few sips of water from a canteen, does tend to knock me out of the story. People are often surprised by the volume of food and water a horse actually needs in a day.

There are lots of interesting things about horses historically that people don't know. Horseshoes and stirrups were invented later than many people think, for instance.