NEW VIDEO ON 2021 HORSE DOMESTICATION STUDIES: Watch my video based on the latest research now: ua-cam.com/video/dYw8NnQ1tpk/v-deo.html Thanks for watching. If you enjoy this video you will like my other videos on history and prehistory so check them out here: People of the Bronze Age Playlist: ua-cam.com/play/PLUyGT3KDxwC8u4jG_tOjN-8-bsHxucUxn.html Bronze Age Warfare Playlist: ua-cam.com/play/PLUyGT3KDxwC8xD2S2Q1IqH_S_ocWwXWHv.html Medieval History Playlist: ua-cam.com/play/PLUyGT3KDxwC_Jh59Fp5aU5Fzj0oUXUkEJ.html
I would not say it's a niche topic. Horse domestication is one of the fundamental events of human history. You did a great job explaining the two main theories.
I can think of two reasons for riding a horse either on the hip or at the withers. If you look at an equine skeleton you will see that the vertebrae over the centre back have bony protrusions sticking upwards (called spinous processes) where ligaments and muscles attach. These upward-pointing spikes make riding without a saddle very uncomfortable. However, they get smaller at the base of the neck and over the hips. Another reason could be that earlier horses which had not been selectively bred were quite weak in the middle. Cave paintings depict horses with very straight backs which would not have had the elasticity conferred by the more curved back of the modern horse. Of course, it could also mean that the spinous processes were larger and even more uncomfortable than they are today.
The way I was taught in university was that the early Indo Europeans used chariots as horses at the time were too small to be ridden on and only once horses reached larger sizes due to selective breeding. The first large scale of horse back riding was in Assyria in the iron age. At least that's what they taught us 20+ years back.
Hi Dan - I would like to take the opportunity to thank you for your great content, I really appreciate it! The bronze age is the epoch when our modern world started to form, in its best and worst aspects. Sometimes I think that I'm suffering what one could call "epoch dysphoria" - the wish to have lived in another time when the world was "more magical" and everything was meaningful, when a voyage of one hundred kilometers was a (potentially life-threatening) adventure but there were also no borders and you could be in the wilderness for weeks without finding any hint of other humans. But I'm also not naive and aware that it is easy to romanticise these times from our modern perspective, times when families died of starvation because the winter was a little longer than expected, a man of 40 years was considered old and women were considered legitimate loot in warfare. People were more free and less free as we are today at the same time. Strange.
I think the “experts” might not have enough experience with horses. Riding without saddle & bit is not an impossibility. Doing so with skill & speed is something I’ve witnessed children do. Certainly, growing up with your foal and learning young creates a friendship between rider & horse. This bond is mutually affectionate. In that circumstance, the rider using legs only to control their horse while using weapons is easy enough. Of course no evidence of that is likely to be found
A friend of mine used to work in a jousting show and had ridden since childhood, he tells me good riders direct more with their knees than their bridles.
@@thebrocialist8300 Man what a disagreeable racist individual you have to be. Sometimes I think people are generally kind and good, and then people like you come along….
At the same time, though, the modern horse has been bred to be a riding animal. So it is not clear that analogies from modern horses capture all the difficulties of riding early domesticated horses.
I think it is a mistake, to assume that the bit is the only way to control a horse. Spanish riding traditional uses what is called a hackamore. A woven strip of rawhide encircles the horses muzzle. Pressure on the muzzle, controls the horse. In modern times, the people of Mongolia ride horses very similar to ancient horses. Very short, and very stocky. The argument that short and stocky horses would not be an advantage, is somewhat ridiculous. Training a wild horse, without the use of a previously trained horse, is nigh impossible. However, if a young foal were captured, after the killing of its mother, it would be quite easy to train that horse. Very much in the same way that wolf puppies we're probably trained, to be domestic companions. I think that modern archaeologists have a tendency to belittle the abilities of ancient peoples. It is important to remember that they were every bit as smart as we are. To say that early peoples were not capable of doing what we do all the time, shows a tremendous amount of hubris. If they were eating horses, they had access to foals. If they had access to foals, then they had access to rideable mounts. Personally, I believe that domestication occurred very early. However, archaeological proof of such domestication would be unlikely to survive. This is why we have not found walrus skin boots, from ancient times. But that's another topic, entirely. Enjoyed the video. Keep it up
You are 100 percent correct, just like archaeologists claimed that Ancient Man selected the wolves with little fear for humans that followed the camp, no they didn't they took puppies and the puppies had no fear of humans because they are pack animals same thing with horses oh, they killed and ate the adult and raised the foal which had no fear of human
You are my kind of man! I read this thinking, I might as well have written it - including the opinion on archaeologists. 👍🏻 however what I meant to comment myself is, I wonder if there aren't any ancient legends on taming the horse. As with the archaeologists (these poor people's careers can be ruined if they dared speculate as we can!), we also underestimate the ancient legends. I started believing in them when I read about the discovery of Celtic burial in the Bull's Rock cave in Moravia. There had been legends (by the word of mouth) about men in white robes and fire and yelling and moaning... when they excavated the cave, the burial was 3.5 thousand years old! So if a legend can survive that long, why not ten thousand? Ok, and the reason why I wonder is that a domestication of horse was done by "the people", but taming of first horse was done (possibly) by one person, and then the whole tribe learned the skill. And such person gets a special place in legends, and possibly even supernatural powers. So I'd be researching the tales of the folks in the likely areas where the horses were tamed. That could give us surprising clues. Just looking at the Epona story is interesting: why is a woman associated with horse godess? Isn't it showing the special relationship we see today (most of the members of any youth horse club are girls)? What if the first horse tamer was girl? Also, how old is the Epona worship? Can we assume that before becoming a deity some three thousand years ago, there could be centuries of more detailed legend that are now lost? Why should we assume that Epona cult started suddenly, without prior history before becoming a cult? Can we not guess the age of the story by researching the variations of Epona and horse names in various indoeuropean languages? We know "equus" (q changed to P in some Celtic languages), we have "pony", in my native Czech we have "kůň", which is obviously from the same origin, the possibilities are many.
@@peterkratoska3681 I've seen the video on feral dog but that is not wolves 60000 years ago when wolves would have been a serious threat to humans although I have been looking into toxoplasmosis in animals making them less aggressive toxoplasmosis may have led to domestication of many animals. I don't know if anyone is studying this but it is an interesting topic
As a rider of dressage, I can readily see where riding a horse bareback without saddle or bridle would be extremely easy given time to adjust the body to relax and give "signals" through the seat bones and legs. I often rode my horse without saddle or bridle and found that by turning my torso, moving my legs back or forward, would cause my horse to turn or stop depending on pressure of my upper thigh or lower leg. Even turning my shoulders would cause change of direction. All is dependent on the rider's relaxation or minute tension, and going with the horses movement. I suspect early man would have wanted to move with the speed of a running horse at some time or another and would have eventually tried to get on the back of a horse just to go fast. I suspect all this happened much earlier than scientists believe as the curiosity of the human is far stronger than most believe.
I primarily ride/event/show/etc my horses bareback and bridleless due to my Ehlers Danlos Syndrome causing the slight tension from saddles and reins to dislocate my joints. It's not overwhelmingly difficult/impossible to communicate with your horse without aids; as long as you spend time with it, working on bodily control, and approach it with a "I'm with you as a partner, not here to micromanage you" attitude. It's definitely not out of the realm of possibility that they did the same back then in order to ride horses.
The first human to ride a horse must have been a badass. It probably took a long time for this to be a normal practice and even longer to be widespread but it happened everywhere horses are which is most of Eurasia.
@@KickAssCowgirl27 the American Plains Indians had no experience of horses till the Spanish brought them back in the 14th century- yet the Apache were renowned as the greatest light cavalry. They weren't much for saddles either. Fr
I once rode a horse bareback without reins or hackamore inside a fenced area, his name was Dandy who was also blind in one eye. We connected and as we walked around the pasture, he responded to my hand touch and leg pressure…I was holding onto his mane above his shoulder…. He was awesome. My three favorite horses were Dandy, Dixie and Tony, all unique individuals, all a joy to ride and I connected with all of them and many times I rode bareback as well, so it is possible to ride a horse without tack of any kind, but the connection between horse and rider is a must gift for this ability, besides including kindness, a sincere understanding and a deep respect is a must between horse and rider. These horses were NOT mine, they belonged to someone else, but they let me ride them. I still think about them often. I’m 74 now, and unable to ride horses anymore, and of which I do greatly miss. 👍❤️🙏🏼
As a horsewoman and behaviourist, your account of equine hierarchy, herd structure and behaviour in such a succinct and informed way is one of the best I have ever heard.... from history or indeed from any horse behaviourist or trainer! Brilliant 👏
I think that the role of children in the development of riding has been ignored. If captured ponies were being used as pack animals or to pull travois, it would not be long before they were used to carry small children, in the same way that burros and asses are commonly used. Everywhere in agricultural societies, you see children astride a variety of domesticated animals (my Philipino nephew was riding water buffalo practically from birth). I suspect that this practice familiarized the horse with the human and the human with the horse in such a way that older and older children remained on the horses until they began to direct them autonomously, rather than just being carried as baggage.
@@xScooterAZxPerhaps so. But why is it hard to imagine tough, bold kids playing with fierce horses ? People today have no clue what free kids are like. My father drove the farm truck (Model A Ford) to town on errands as soon as he could reach the pedals, and hunted with a 4 10 shotgun when he was 9. In many parts of the world it was the role of boys to guard the pasturing herds from large predators.
@@mondopinion3777 Did I say it was hard? No,I didnt. I simply was thinking of how a child might be tired and his Father picking him up and sitting him on a horse. Why does that bother you? Tough,bold,kids with fierce horses? I know the horses my Dad would buy me at auction were always fierce. Half broken so they were bought in bulk cheaply,..and I didnt have any tack,just a rope around their bottom jaw to ride with. He got me 5 in an auction one time. I had to work those horses every day after school. Oh,and I am old enough to remember living in Hungry Horse Montana and going out on my pony cart to get our Milk cannister,which was about 2 1/2 feet high. and taking it home. I'm quite old,and remember doing manual labour type chores. Chopping wood,and stacking it in the barn,etc. So what's your point about your father riding a bike and hunting. Most people I know from my generation know how to do those things. I had my first rifle when I was 5 years old. My Dad had a Model A,..I have photos of him it it too :}
@@xScooterAZx We are much alike then. You should understand what my point is. (but I said my dad was driving a truck, not a bike, to town.) These academic theorists make me irritated with their testosterone-driven stress on war in the domestication of horses, and so do the lame comments by sheltered folk who overprotect their kids and cannot conceive what free kids are like. I thought you were one of them. Sorry.
I grew up on a farm, and had the whole list of animals. My siblings and I attempted to ride literally every one of them that looked like it could support our weight. Pigs, goats, cows, even the neighbors llama. Granted we also had horses, so there's a strong chance that knowing riding might be a possibility inspired us to attempt it in the first place. I can't help but feel early man did the same thing. :D I agree with many people in this comments section pointing out that horses were likely taken in at very young ages, likely after the death of the parental guardian. They were raised in environments where they never developed, or quickly conquered their fear of man. Even today, you can find examples of this all over the world in the most unlikely places: Pet lions and tigers, bears, chimpanzee's, the list is extremely long. And with that I have to echo what I said above. Those early humans definitely looked at those horses that they could now interact with and thought, 'I wonder if I can ride that thing'. They likely took turns, and it likely turned into sport, and I'm sure they quickly thought up ways to improve the experience. This attitude, this behavior, is what it IS to be human in large part: Curious tool users. Great video, really enjoyed!
As well, I am sure the ancients would have seen birds or small animals climb on the backs of a horse laying down. It just isn't a far stretch to think that a person then would approach a subservient mare laying down and try to get on it's back. I am also in agreement with the idea of children connecting with foals and establishing a bond leading to riding the horse.
I wonder if anyone has tried tracing the centaur myths to their origins. I always imagined they were the result of the first mounted warriors attacking a village or people that hadn’t seen horses before or at least never seen someone ride one. “Man they came out of no where big 4 legged animals with human torsos attached to them and just started killing us!!”
The Aztec at first thought that Cortez's horsemen were animals with two heads. So, it's easy to see the concept of the centaur being a folkloric survival of the encounter with horse riding nomadic peoples.
I have watched modern Lakota in South Dakota ride bare over hilly terrain back using the manes to hold onto. Their relatives did so too with only a couple centuries experience with horses. I have also watched amazing horse riding acrobatics in Hungary where only simple harnesses were used. It is easy to conclude that ancient nomadic cultures probably had even greater knowledge and skill from a millennia of living with their 4 legged companions.
that said, these early horses were still at the advent of their development, genes that gave them stronger backs, longer legs, better heart endurance, easier trainability is still just developing which makes it all the more impressive
Horses were introduced to the Americas (and the Native American people) by the Spanish in the late 1400s. They did know about saddles. However, it was just simpler to not use them. I also prefer no saddle or bridle depending on the horse.
Hello Dan, There was a very interesting documentary on the invention of trousers done by the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut a couple years ago (uploaded to youtube). They posited that the development was necessitated by horse riding. The artifact that was being analyzed was a pair of the oldest known trousers of 2,500 years ago. They were found in a burial site that also had a whip and bridles. It was found in the Tarim basin in East and Central Asia. Worth watching.
The first horsemen were the kids that raised the little foal, with the help of several of the old tribe elders. They played with it, used it to help them gather firewood and other items.. As the colt grew, and several of the youngsters managed to learn to ride it, the young horse and rider began scouting for the tribe, accomplishing in hours, what would otherwise have taken days. Thus the value of the young horse and rider was understood beyond question. Similarly, paleo kids were probably the first to use flattened frozen hides/skins as play to slide down snowy slopes and hills.. Huge fun and learning experience.
I can see early man killing a mare…..and the scared foal hung around. Plus, it smelled its mom on them. While old enough to eat grass, it was still attached to mom. So it follows the hunters home because the rest of the herd is long gone. Initially confused, the hunters laugh this off as a snack following it home. Making for a easy kill later on. Well, the foal hangs around, at out of loneness decides to hang around a younger non aggressive human for companionship. This human child may be the kid of a high ranking clan member, so the parent tells the other hunters to leave the foal be for now, since it makes his kid happy. Well, you know kids. They love climbing on things. Ever see them with a dog? After a few months, the kid and foal get really attached. The foal grows, and the kid likes the crawl on it. The now older horse is kind of a quiet omega animal, so it decides it’s better to put up with these scary humans, then being alone. Plus, one human feeds it treats sometimes and keeps nasty predators away. Well, one day, the kid fully sits on the young horses back. Horse crow hops a few times, turns its head, sniffs, and decides to just keep grazing. Kid is initially just thrilled with that. But seeing the horse move around, and even run he starts to get an idea. He teaches the horse how to respond to a rope(pressure) on the ground (so it won’t wonder off either). He fashions a crude halter, gets on its back, and applies pressure with the halter and legs for the young horse to move. Horse, initially startled, decides to do what the “alpha” is telling it do do. After some trial and error, he is able to ride around, maybe even putting a leather thong around the neck, or a crude blanket on the horses back for grip. This definitely got the tribes attention, and the young ladies swooning at the sight. This of course gets the other guys attention. They want to impress the ladies too. Perhaps they catch other young horses after a hunt and try to copy the first guy. A few succeed and other uses for horses for hunting , travel, warfare, scouting, and packing goods is quickly discovered. I am convinced a young man or kid was the first to get on a horses back, and impressed the adults.
I'm reminded of the idea that you couldn't use a lance on horseback as a shock trooper before the invention of stirrups. Then some people tested it and found out that you could even use a lance on horseback without the benefit of any sort of riding gear. Instead the stirrup probably better enabled melee on horseback, making it so a fighter could extend his reach by using his legs to regain his balance and make it that much harder for footmen to dehorse him.
@@derrickbonsell there is a saddle that was used that allowed some degree of stability. I belive it was first used my the acheminid empire and then used by Alexander's cavalry.
But then you have evidence from the ancient world explicitly saying that. Xenophon says they couldn't strike with a spear from horseback without risk of falling off.
Yeah for some time historians believed the Roman saddle was of a soft leather kind until archeologists discovered actual surviving wood and leather roman saddles with the four horn tree design, enabling much more stability. The earliest saddles with hard pieces rather than only blankets and leather found so far are from about 500 BC I think on the eastern steppe.
When I lived in New Zealand we would come across wild horses around a place called Waiouru, quite magnificent to see them running free, I have a Hungarian horse bow but alas as close as I've come to a wild horse in the UK was a Tesco's lasagna. 😬
How about the ghostly sights of a giant moose in the fog..on the south island in N.Z...i think south island..I read about Theodore Roosevelt bringing them there..but very rarely seen if at all..but I only read such news and know not from truth or false..
@@tashaarellano7680 I've not seen a moose in New Zealand, and done plenty of hunting in my time with rifle and bow there. I would surmise that it was a fiordland wapiti which grow huge in size with massive antlers that was mistaken for a moose if one the person who 'spotted it' was unfamiliar with moose or maybe the wapitis antlers were covered in undergrowth giving a moose like appearance, I've seen plenty of moose in Scandinavia and I could understand the mistake. That been said there are some strange tails of unaccountable creatures sneaking around in the depths of some of those dark forests in the South Island. I've learnt not to write off any accounts from tails of the forests as I have personally witnessed time itself stop and have myself and a friend stand in limbo for what must have been hours, a life changing experience with no explanation.
@@terryharris1291 at least at night you could hear the horses clip clop when they came up on your hole to give you a sniff, not so with the Maori sergeants , sneaky mofos Hit it Brother ua-cam.com/video/Bto47Lq7sCs/v-deo.html
I didn't know male horses have canine teeth . My gosh , I am 62 yrs old and still learning new things and more interested in learning than ever before in my life .
I've owned horses for 60 years. I can't remember more than a few mares that didn't have them. They are often removed because of the bit hitting them causing pain /infection
If Botai horses were not domesticated then we need not assume Przewalski's horses were ever domesticated since they descend from Botai horses. The big DNA paper looking at steppe horse DNA has been in the pipeline since 2018 and still isn't published but when it is out we will know for sure whether modern horse breeds descend from WSH horses and that will be very telling in regards to who domesticated them. As for mounted warfare - i don't believe WSH used horses in battle either. I think they would be perfect for scouting and also as symbols of power to intimidate enemies though.
Yeah there's now no good evidence the Przewalski's ancestors were ridden but some researchers believe there was some domestication - herding or managing and milking. Although other evidence suggests they weren't even doing that. I dunno what Alan Outram reckons as of 2021. But loose management systems are extremely difficult to detect. And for sure - a band of large men coming over the horizon riding horses slowly toward your village would have been absolutely baffling and horrifying. And it's quite possible that only a select few early people were "the riders" in their society. Experts at travelling distances rapidly. Hard to imagine that cultures where raiding was so central to their culture would not have taken advantage of it.
@@DanDavisHistory Amino acids preserved in Botai pottery confirm horse milk was used. This is proof of horse domestication for cattle-like purposes (milk and meat). Frozen Scythian remains preserve at least three versions of horse harnessing.
If you look at the Norwegian fjord horse, there is a lot of likenesses to the Przewalski horses. So much so, that there must have been breeding and domestication. By the way, how do you milk a horse without domesticating it?
@@PotPoet An interesting fact is that humans cannot consume horse milk, due to its high lactose content. However, horse milk's high sugar content means that it will ferment within 24 hours, to create airag or khumis. So, one wonders what was kind of horse milk was in the pottery? Alcohol wouldn't leave a residue, I suppose? Horse milk can be made into yogurt balls - qurt or kurut, a staple of all horse riding nomads. www.atlasobscura.com/articles/what-is-qurt
@@oduffy1939 Stupid question. If horse milk is to high lactose to drink, then how does consuming it in other ways also not have high lactose? People I know who are lactose intolerant usually stay away from things like ice cream or other dairy products Wouldn't the lactose remain to high, of it's to high to drink?
I ride bareback and without a bit all the time, you don't control a horse with a bit, you control them with their nose. Its not impossible to ride without. Maybe for someone who doesn't know horses. I also ride a dominant mare, the head mares are worth their weight in gold, she was search and rescue. Bought her for about 500$ and learned to ride on a dominant male gelding, and gentled the ex stud in my profile pic. I have some quams with the experts, I actually went to school for equine studies, and have lots of yeses and nos. I recommend looking up mustang makeover contestants if you really wanna learn about the wild ones. Bits also predate the wheel, riding did come first, I remember that test question in My equine history class very well. It was stirrups that were the HUGE game changer. Mongolia and Kahastekstan were the first to domesticate and did it around the same time. Many native tribes in rhe US favored mares for their overprotectiveness and willingness to defend their riders. Mares, and horses in general will lay down their life for you. Mules and donkeys, to the 11th degree. Even though we originally domesticated for food, they're mankind's most underrated and misunderstood MVP. Horses originated in North America, migrated, and died off, but continued to live everywhere else
You're right about the stirrup, which the Huns brought to Europe in the 5th century. About horses protecting the rider, Mongolian epic poetry and folklore always depicts the hero's horse as his faithful companion, who in the midst of battle fights alongside the hero. The horse also speaks to the hero and is often the one who exhorts the hero when he falters.
@@Yarblocosifilitico Horses got across the the Stepps by the same route the First Nations peoples were supposed to have gotten to North America - from what is now currently Alaska to Russia. That being the case, its likely the Mongolians were the first humans to see horses since they lived in the area.
@@Whistlewalk the Mongolians? really? Not even proto-Mongols, PIEs or Scythians? If we're only talking about 'seeing' horses, well, the Denisovans coexisted with some proto-horses about 24,000 years ago. I don't think the Mongolians can top that ;P siberiantimes.com/science/casestudy/news/n0877-remains-of-extinct-zebra-like-horse-found-at-denisova-cave-home-of-ancient-man/ I guess Denisovans aren't technically 'humans', but still, plenty of ancient humans before the Mongolians. It's probably impossible to know which hominid saw horses for the first time. Horses might have gotten to the Americas through Siberia to Alaska but that doesn't mean they weren't roaming the rest of Eurasia long before that. Horses and hominids could've met for the first time pretty much anywhere in Eurasia.
I wouldn't be surprised if the first person to mount a horse, was a kid who mounted up on the back of their pet, because they didn't know any better. The horse trusted the owner, and the kid didn't weight too much to cause the animal pain and discomfort.
To a young boy there is nothing more natural (or fun) than getting on the back of a relatively tame horse. There are plenty of men (and women) walking around Texas who first sat on a horse when they were months old.
This is pretty much what happens in the book series I read about our early ancestors, Earths Children. The main girl has to survive on her own and stock up for winter. She makes a pit trap and traps a mare, kills it, ect, only to see it had a foal. She feels bad and takes it with her to care for, and by the time the foal grows up, it trusts her enough for her to get on its back, and was strong enough for the girl, who was small anyways in weight, to not hurt it. Its an outdated story, admittedly, but it gives an interesting take on a couple domestication processes, the horse being a big one.
@Mel Hawk oh! I won't spoil it then. Just that yea...def got a Pandoras box vibe. Made me wonder if its actually where the myths began, from real people in our past who managed "extroadinary" things, for their time, and their stories being embellished through the centuries.
I have a horse who was a wild stallion. I ride with no bit and trained him initially without a saddle. My daughter jumps him bareback and bridleless. The bit is meant to be communication tool, not a control mechanism. It informs the head and shoulders while the legs inform the barrel and hind end.
Even if they weren't riding them into battle, I could easily see a band using them to get from point a to point b, then dismount to fight. Like Dragoons originally did during the 16th and early 17th centuries. Being able to move quickly on a horse from your camp to a fight had to be valuable in of itself or just lash the loot or supplies to the horse as you move along. Even if a cavalry charge wasn't a thing. I could easily see horses and horse riding being a valuable aspect of warfare during the Indo-European migration.
The detail on horse domestication in the Horse, the Wheel and Language was one of the best parts of the book.Domestication of the horse was the central most important basis for spurring the economy of the steppe people, from what I have read in this and other sources. I think it's what makes the steppe cultures so very fascinating. They were such innovators and this one thing changed the course of all of future civilizations. It's vital to the history of human civilization, so you need to devote enough time to sufficiently explore it.
Greetings from Canada I think I watched this great little documentary a while ago, but this time thru I’m wondering if the debate about how migratory human populations controlled their horse herds during travel phases. Maybe it was just something that didn’t come up, in the sense that the migratory routes were generations old, and the horses were recognized as being the best navigators of any one of a number of variations and detour necessitating events and obstacles? One thing that is fairly unarguable is how much more confident arrogant presumptuous and fallible human beings are nowadays then they were ten thousand years ago. The narrator almost gets to the point of introducing this type of theory by about minute 24 I think….
I lean towards the hypothesis that the first domesticated horses were used as pack animals, or for hauling sleds and later, carts. Horses at that time were too small to carry an adult human, and increasing their size took centuries of breeding. Evidence for this argument is that battle-carts and chariots ruled Mesopotamia and Egypt for centuries. They were used as mobile platforms for archers. They could not have dominated warfare for so long if horse-archers existed.
@@indramuhammad1942 No, horses were introduced into those regions long after the first civilisations formed. Horses were endemic on the plains and steppes much further North and East, and were an important food source for nomadic hunters. The first people to domesticate horses were of the Botai culture, in the area around Kazakhstan. The domestication of horses began by using captured animals as draft-horses and for milk. The invention of the wheel was the deciding factor in the spread of horses. Mesopotamians first used oxen or asses to haul 'battle-carts', but by 2,500 BCE they had adopted horses and chariots soon followed.
As a child, I rode horses bareback and used my knees and the horses' manes to transmit commands. I often use a halter instead of a bridle. I have seen people giving commands to horses with their feet while standing up on them and also using clucking sounds. A wild horse can be trained for basic riding in less than a month. Surely modern horses, even wild ones, probably have traits selected over time by humans that makes training easier. I suspect, however, that those traits were always there in some horses. While I doubted it until I saw it, there is the phenomenon of the horse whisperer. I wonder how that could have played into the domestication of horses to allow riding them. There's something special between some people and some horses.
@@maggiethedruid9010 I'll bet you don't wear spurs, either. I haven't used them since I was about 12. Really, with a trained horse spurs aren't necessary, and I wouldn't use them today at any point in a horse's training.
I grew up with horses and even though I live in a city now, I've never stopped being fascinated by horses and I'm always researching and learning as much as I can about these incredible animals. This video taught me some super cool facts I didn't know, like stallions having evolved canines for fighting and those amazing cheek plates - just wow! I'm so appreciative!! Love your videos xo
Thanks for a great video and for having the humility to present the various theories in as fair a way as is possible, and without pretending to know things that probably nobody knows for sure.
I'd say that once horses started being domesticated for food that's when the riding began. It's a natural progression of human thought. Human wants to sit on rock, stone or log as opposed to ground. Here's a seemingly docile animal right next to me about hip height, I'll indulge my curiosity or your dare and see what happens if I do this.
@@zenolachance1181 The horses referred to in this video and that I am referring to are pony sized or not much bigger than. You're speaking of modern horses, this video is not.
Most people are not aware how cold resistant horses actually are: the breed of the turkic yakut/Sakha people in north-east siberia can deal with temperatures of -70°C/-94°F, being outdoors all the year - and winter lasts almost 9 month there. The yakut cattle is extremly resistant too - although it is less resilient than the horses and is usually brought to stables during winter occasionally cattle escapes into the wild and survives to the next spring. I'm extremly fascinated by the yakut/Sakha who fled from the mongols to the north and adapted their typical turkic nomadic lifestyle to one of the harshest environments on earth.
@@oduffy1939 Yes, they are also reindeer herders - but so are the mongols. The republic of Sakha (yakutia) is a gigantic territory, the largest subnational region of the world and comparably big as the european union - so it depends where exactly you are. Further north yakutia is characterized by tundra where the reindeer which can live of mosses is the primary lifestock, further south the horse plays are role. The sakha/yakut migrated from regions further south to their lands to escape the mongols in the middle ages and took their horses with them. Their non-turkic neighbors who partly share their territory rely less on horse and cattle and are more specialized on the reindeer.
I think a good piece of evidence for the early riding hypothesis is the high value placed on horses by Yamnaya (and descendant peoples) who were mainly eating sheep and cows. They were burying people with horse skulls and hides, had horse head shaped maces, and horse inscribed stones. Also the horse was very important ritually to the indo european peoples, with a common ritual significance shared by peoples whose ancestry split before the late horse riding hypothesis is dated to.
I was wondering about that. I can buy that maybe the spread of the Proto-Indo-Europeans was due to the mastery of cart/chariot technology rather than horseback riding, but it really surprised me to hear that there was nothing before the first millennium BC (not even in the Vedas?) that suggested a more intimate/"bums on backs" relationship between Indo-Europeans and the horses that seemed to be pretty important to them judging by the texts and legends that have come down to us and our ability to identify so many horse-related words of Proto-Indo-European by tracing existing cognates of later and even modern Indo-European languages back to common roots...
Actually it was the botai culture not the yamnaya and they were speaking uralic language. You can find the article on the pubmed by searching keywords.
I have been riding horses for over 50 years , I have een a jockey and broke in lots of horses and I agree with many of you , a horse has to learn how to be riding , and the bit is completly uselesss the fist month or so , and the saddle is not a most . the fact is that you don´t all this to teach a horse to be riden , he has to game trust in you to let you progressively sit on them
Gosh thoroughly enjoyed this. Thank you. Back in the 1970's I used to work for a horse dealer (just north of London!) he would buy unbroken three year olds from local markets like Southall, Stow etc., and within a few weeks having gained their trust I could handle them eg brush, groom, pick out hoofs etc., get them used to traffic on a lead rope and back and bring them on for basic commands walk, trot canter etc., before they were sold on. Trust and kindness was everything and patience. I'd never heard of 'free riding' back then (without bridles and saddles) but there are plenty of vids about it here on UA-cam. This again is very much based on trust. I'm guessing this how how people may have ridden initially far more in tune and connected to the natural world including horses than many of us are now? PS The men riding on this vid have appalling seats and are using the bits/ reins for balance. Horses heads are up and open trying to evade the pain. Terrible. Painful to watch.
The "chariot first" theory for warfare makes more sense to me. Trying to fight and control a large animal by yourself seems daunting. Having someone else drive leaves you free to shoot and throw. It is also a much shorter leap from wagons to chariots, than wagons to riding.
From what I've read about Sumerian chariots, they were rather slow moving cumbersome four wheeled vehicles drawn by onagers compared to the fast moving two spoke-wheeled Egyptian/Hittite chariots of the late Bronze Age. They were difficult to manuever and could only be made to charge into battle in one direction on flat grounds. The need to turn direction would've being difficult to achieve, while rocky ground would've been dangerous as it could knock the charioteers off their platform, or shatter the chariot's wheels or overturn the vehicle. It would've been intimidating for the mountain tribes that periodically invaded Mesopotamia who'dve been unused to the sight though, and as a result it would've been an effective psychological weapon.
@@bc7138 also you have terrifying option of just putting blades on your chariot and lighting it on fire suicide bombing the front lines of your enemy of course I mean that later on in history when horses could run a tad bit faster
A pulling horse takes 3 x the training of a ridden horse. With a wagon/chariot only the bit gives clues of what to do. A good horseman can ride with no bit, just using legs & body movement's to let the horse know what to do. Ever notice that troops pulling cannon always have at least one troop mounted when pulling. Not expert, but have trained a few horses to both ride & pull.
I am Afghan and the word literally means "Horsemen" in Persian because the Sassanian knew we had the best breed of horses and were excellent breeders. The Proto-Indo Iranians (Aryans) are believed to be the first people to domesticate the horse in the Eurasian steppes, even the oldest chariots trace back to the Sinastha culture in Central Asia where they came from. In Pashtun culture, horses are well revered.
Oh yes, one of my favourite poems, although I realize that it's as colonialist as all getout -- everyone kowtowed to the British or Kipling's poems wouldnt sell; it is still mainly a tribute to the horsemanship of the Afghan people. Rudyard Kipling's "The Ballad of East and West". He probably figured out how to celebrate Afghani's fantastic riding while making it look as though the British were really in control.
Chariot???? You means chart or wagons that already exist +the best horse breed??? Hahaha that why the Persian breeds were Helpless with barb(in roman period) and Arabian horse in early meidival age
Also, especially since you mentioned the Comanche, early horse warriors could have used horses to transport themselves to the site of battle, dismount to fight, then remount and ride away, rather than fighting from the saddle like you see in later cavalry developments. The Comanche used horses in this way on their infamous raids rather than fight from the saddle, and this is possibly how horses were used early on
This is exactly wrong. Among the plains Indians it was only the Comanches who actually fought from the back of the horse. All the other goups such as Sioux and Apache would ride to battle on the horse and dismount to fight. The Comanches developed shooting from horseback to a high skill including what is now a rodeo trick of shielding the rider behind the horse's neck while shooting under it. The Comanches shot while riding using bows and arrows, but also with revolvers. The Texas Rangers picked up firing from horseback with pistols from the Comanches which became the Rangers' distinctive tactic including against the Comanches themselves.
@@haroldbridges515I'll do more research but I was under the impression that what you're suggesting is a common misconception.....Either way it's beside my point lol My main point being that this was how some horse cultures throughout time chose to fight, and it's likely that early horse people's would fight in this way especially given the size of early horses and the lack of specialist riding equipment. Whether it was the Sioux, Comanche, or British dragoons is neither here nor there but if Am spreading misinformation about the specifics of the culture I apologize
@@seanpoore2428 With respect to the historical Comanches, the question is not how they would fight, but how they did fight. It is not a matter of speculation. My information came from "Empire of the Summer Moon" by S. C. Gwynne which is about the Comanches.
@@haroldbridges515 Ok......Comanches aside......Many OTHER groups of people DID fight from the saddle, and Many other groups of people DID fight by riding to their location, dismounting to fight on foot, then using the horses to make a quick getaway (often with loot or slaves). Both tactics Were used historically, even sometimes both being used concurrently within a single army. Dragoons would often dismount to fight like super mobile infantry while other cavalry fought from horseback without dismounting. However the who is MUCH less important in this case bc thats not what im pushing for. Whether it was one tribe or another doesnt change the core of my point bc it Was Done. The only speculation here is whether the ancient horse peoples of the neolithic did this before chariots or not. My assertion is that its a possibility. But again, if the mostly irrelevant Comanche point is misinformation im sorry, but it still applies to other horsemen that we know about.
Comanches didn't just fight from their horses, they lived on their horses. Once they had mastered horsemanship, Comanches didn't walk much unless they had no alternative.
I learned earlier this year that horses were already present in America before the Spanish and they even said that it was those horses that made it over to Asia across the land bridge. It was basically the complete opposite of what had been established. I love this sort of archeological research because every year, we learn more and more, with every dig, book found, etc., etc. It's pretty cool! Seeing all those old culture names was pretty amazing, since they were so foreign to me. It really makes you think about how humans developed over time and who survived and what got passed down to today, if anything at all.
not only horses... camels too... they both evolved in the Americas and when the landbridge brought the Siberians open, the animals spread to Asia and beyond... but the Siberians in the Americas ate the horses in the continent, and considering that the escaping to Asia horses were the size of a dog... then yes!... the Spaniards brought back an all-new species...
@user-McGiver Yeah, they weren't anything like what we have now. They were pretty small...I think even smaller than miniature horses. Would have made for a tasty snack for someone or something!
@@Shifang Yeah!... try ''everyone and everything'' better, and explain that to the horse too... that by finding a use for it and ''evolving'' it we saved it... the thing is that those invading from Siberia ''Mongols'' [ same religion and customs ] ate the entire mega-fauna of the Americas... outa ''love and respect for life and Nature'' [crap]
Horses of th present variety were present in North America 18000 years ago and the ancestors of our Indigenous cousins slaughtered over 1000 Genera of species including the horse (the Pleistocene Extinction). I grew up around Plains Indians and they say "the horse made us" but none of them realize it was actually the Spanish who made them by re-introducing horses to North America ... but this time they were smart enough to ride them rather than slaughter them. The notion of the ecological in tune Indian is worse that a myth - it is a lie.
that's not the opposite of what had been established - the fact that horses originate in America, from where they migrated into Asia, is well known for quite some time. Other thing is that American wild horses later died out and were only reintroduced by Europeans in early modern times... now, there is some evidence that some American horses potentially survived into later pre-Columbian times, but the clear pattern of horse-riding spreading and completely altering lifestyle of plain tribes in early modern times shows that these potential survivors weren't domesticates and didn't have any real impact on pre-Colombian society...
I raced my Arabian bareback with other teenagers. Afterwards my horse and I would run full speed back to the barn for oats. A braided rope and the belief that Indians rode that way so it HAD to be. Possible. My first horse at age 4 was a Shetland Pony. Loved him dearly and he was so calm around children like me. Man has tamed many animals and we were made for a garden full of all sorts of animals. It still feels right.😊
@@DanDavisHistory yes lol. Arabian folklore states the first horses were tamed by them. I study Arab culture a lot and have a lot of Arab friends. Trust me even non nationalist Arabs think they tamed the first horses
I imagine the early horse-eaters used them somewhat as the Suomi use reindeer. Riding, if it happened at all, would be of minor importance, and I can't see it happening at all until well after mares were first milked. Possibly horses were first used as pack animals, or to pull a travois. The early Irish used to hitch horses to the plough by tying it to their tail. The Mesopotamian horse racing looks remarkably like a donkey derby, and that is still the most popular way to ride a donkey bareback. A proper saddle, even a Roman style one with no stirrups, makes a great difference in speed for either horse or donkey.
@@SigurdVolsunga On the contrary. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Act_against_Plowing_by_the_Tayle,_and_pulling_the_Wooll_off_living_Sheep I read the Estyn Evans essay that it cites many years ago.
@@SigurdVolsunga the Spanish in Mexico used the horses tail to rope cattle before they developed a saddle with a horn . Saddles with roping horns are a recent development , about 300 years old . As well the plow you are thinking of is a moldboard plow which is also very recent development , the earlier plows were just a sharp stick with a beam , which could easily be pulled by a horse tail . Some times they were pulled by the farmers wife
@@jenniferbrien3408 it must have been an ard (a point for breaking the ground) rather than a true plough. A horse simply wouldn't be able to actually plough by pulling it with it's tail. There is just way to much force required to pull an actual plough through the ground. An online search on this mainly found Irish sources calling tales of them tieing inplements to horses tails slander, and descriptions of crude harrows tied to horses tails.
When we speak about the invention of gunpowder, one of the arguments against its convergent invention in Europe and China is that it appears in European historical record alongside basic firearms. While Mesopotamia might have left first concrete evidence of horses being ridden, wouldn't there then have been a period when horses were used for other purposes there, like gunpowder was used for medicine and later fireworks in China, before it was used for weaponry?
"Numidian horsemen rode without saddles or bridles, controlling their mounts with a simple rope around their horse's neck and a small riding stick. They had no form of bodily protection except for a round leather shield or a leopard skin, and their main weapon were javelins in addition to a short sword." (Wikipedia) So the technology needed to be effective mounted warriors would certainly have been available to neolithic horse herders. Whether the horses were capable of being used in the style of the numidians is another question and just because something was possible doesn't mean people actually did it, but it seems a lot more likely that early horsemen would have fought primarily with javelins than as shock troops with battleaxes.
It appears that the Numidian Horsemen were superb. The Roman Cavalry could neither chase them off or close with them to engage. They probably had some sort of gear on their mounts to carry javelins and water/wine bottles at the very least.
@@cliffordjensen8725 artwork from the period shows them carrying a bundle of spare javelins in their off hand. A waterskin could have been slung over their shoulder if they needed it.
To this day, in my native dialect of Croatia we still call livestock of all kind "blago" which in literal sense means treasure/wealth. As such, a man blessed with livestock/horses is blessed in wealth indeed. This most of all regards to bovines and horses.
@@DanDavisHistory I find your videos extremely interesting and wish you all the best in your future works ! I am happy your videos are picking up, they certainly deserve the attention. Bronze Age is criminaly underresearched and lacking its presence in attention of people who are interested in history. But I am happy that in recent few years both archeology and people like you are doing great work to bring up this very interesting age into its deserved spotlight.
The Anglo-Saxon word "fee" come from the word for cattle. As with most Indo-European pastoral peoples, cattle was the currency. In ancient Ireland, a man could only have a wife if he had the required number of cows, sheep, and horses; and he would pay the bride's family in a set number of cattle.
Wow! Blago means something good in Russian. Blagodarit' - "to thank", where darit' means "to give". So that literally means "to give cattle". I've just learned something new. Thanks 👍 P.s. I can't give you any cattle, though, as I don't own any. 😁😁😁
Make sens, considering that this took place over a wide era, thousands of years, so sure, they was used to horse, hunted them for ages, observed and knowed them well. Maybe they became less with time for some reason, then people protected their food ressources against other people and predators. With the time, some foals was raised, and of course, became still tamer, and one day, why not, one hopped on them after lot other trials. ;) - Fall was hard, but would do it again !
Probably the first to try were teenage boys playing with horses that were being kept for food. You get some boys around any kind of animal big enough to ride, and they'll try it.
more simple, someone placed a child on the back of tamed horse, that started it, or at first they put a basket on the horse while walking to help carry things, and then a basket with a baby and then a kids.. it is simple enough. I have seen 3 year children who have no idea what a horse is get on the back of a big dog.
People raised cattle, sheep, goats, pigs and chickens. "If they were raising them, someone would try riding them" is either wrong or all the attempts were so spectacularly unsuccessful that no-one bothered to try a second time.
@@davidgould9431 People have been riding water buffalos in Indonesia for a long time. My cousin had a cow trained to take a saddled and ride it. People have used oxen for a long time too. I remember it was fun trying to ride the hog.
Many of the native peoples here in North America who captured and used the feral horses that escaped from the Spanish, trained and rode them without bits and bridles. They used a leather thong with a loop in the end that was placed in the horse's mouth for steering and control. Other leather straps were braided into the horse's mane for a handhold, and a simple pad and strap were used for a saddle. The person riding the horse invested a lot of time and effort into training it to work with the rider, just like people do today. Different methods, similar results. There's no reason why the ancient steppe people didn't do the same thing. The leathers would leave it no trace being organic, and it was more than likely only some people were of a mind to try the idea out... There's always one guy or gal who says "I wonder what would happen if..." So, I am of the mind that horse taming and riding was early, but the idea didn't exactly spread like wildfire until later
That was already accounted for by Anthony. They trained horses using leather and hemp bits; their findings suggest that they too would leave marks on horses' teeth.
I never had the impression from reading Anthony that he was suggesting the Yamnaya were capable of mounting actual armed cavalry operations. But it isn't hard to imagine that armed warriors, skilled enough in horse control to manage herds, might have also used them for getting to a location for a quick raid and then escaping on them afterwards. People on foot would have difficulty catching up with raiders who could get away on horses even if for a short distance with relative primitive means of controlling the animals. In fact, this would have been such a valuable advantage that it is hard to imagine someone would not have developed the tactic at a relative early date. One might further conjecture that actual cavalry tactics might have developed later as a means of defending against such predation.
@@DanDavisHistory It is interesting to speculate if improved horsemanship might have played a role in the Bronze Age collapse. More effective mounted forces would have played havoc on the long trade routes that had developed up to that time. And that could be why the Iron age saw the growing use of horses as a military asset.
@@DanDavisHistory I don't think Mr. Shannon was suggesting large scale cavalry operations; but rather small scale raids, perhaps along the lines of the Táin Bó Cúailnge from Irish myth? Cattle raids are a feature of all nomadic/pastoral peoples, with or without horse (or camel) riding. Ten guys riding bareback without horse bits, arrive to the camp of whomever they're raiding. Get off the horses, steal whatever they're stealing, and get back on the horses to escape. Raiding, for pastoral peoples, is what passed for warfare for thousands of years.
To start off with, I love horses. It is hard to remember when I first saw a horse. But I do remember the first time I was close up to a horse. I was maybe 4 years old and to me the horse was so huge. I had to go or shall I say sneak past his stall to go to the toilet each time I needed to go. This was on the farm our family owned in Norway. When I came to Australia at the age of 8 there were several horses in the paddock at the back of our house. These were owned by the commissioner of Police at the time here in Brisbane. I helped the boys from the farm to feed the horses and one of the horses was my favourite. His name was Smokey. I would hop onto his back by grabbing his mane and throwing my leg over his back and holding on for life and limb. He was agisted on a 10 acre, though a long block of land with the other horses and halfway along the block there were some tea trees growing. He would gallop towards the trees with me hanging on, as I said with for dear life. One of the trees had a horizontal branch growing out from it that Smokey was able to fit under whilst galloping at a rather fast speed, though he did slow down a little as he knew I could not fit with me on top of him. So, I always ended up on the ground with him eating grass a foot or so away from my head, probably thinking, 'are you stupid or something boy? We have done this so many times now so you should know what happens'. But I did not care. I would get up and pat and talk to him. Grab him around the neck and swing about off the ground while he still ate grass. But he surprised me one day. I had just filled his container full of chaff and I was standing on his left side as one does when mounting a horse. He was eating and I was stroking him, then suddenly he grabbed me by one of my 9 year old boy boobs and lifted me over the container he was eating from and put me down on his righthand side. He then continued to eat. He had not actually hurt me, nor broken the skin at all, though I did develop a bit of a bruise from his teeth. Even so, I kept stroking him till he was finished so I could put his container, a galvanised baby bath, away. Unfortunately, he ended up with tetanus a couple of years later and had to be destroyed. I have owned my own horses since then and I named one of the Smokey. oooops, that was a rather long story.🙂
Another excellent video! This vid made me think about James Burke’s “Connections” when he talked about how the “stirrup” changed horse mounted warfare drastically. As an innovation it was a turning point that made shock war on horseback even more effective.
Great topic! Always fascinated with how our ancestors lived. I appreciate your use of photos of the covers of the books you referenced. It gives me a subtle motivation to consider buying the books you have used.
Dear Dan, Any history of Equus is welcomed by me. The Anthropological dealings with Equus in Ancient History is fascinating to say the least. I always used to say that St. Paul (was struck off his horse: a white Andulisian - of course) when he met with his conversion, to today; with the diaspora of Equus throughout the world. Well done! As this was a wonderful documentary; reaching back that far. P
Very interesting video, thank you for it I'm firmly on the early riding hypothesis: you can ride a horse without nearly anything at all, especially if as other people mentioned you grew up with it Other thing is I grew up on the farm and I tried to ride any animal we ever had (out of curiosity) - and while adults wouldn't probably do it, I'm sure some of Neolithic kids would have a go: you're just curious and adventurous as a kid. How on Earth do you llive among horses for thousands of years and never try to ride one? Ridiculous.....
Ancient riders probably rode on the back side of the horse because horses spine wasn't adapted to heavy loads in the middle. Even modern horses have a lot of spine problems, even with modern saddles
Oddly, today I heard a radio report that (among other things) said that the genetics of the modern horse gives them a stronger spine than the horse types which are now extinct.
That Mesopotamian 'horse' led by a nose ring (19:54) looked more like wolf to me, like some mythic godlike entity riding a giant wolf and leading it by a nose ring after the fashion of bulls being led by nose rings.
We have an old saying in Germany ""Get a Foal and you get the Mare and then you get the Stallion for free"" The Importens is the Foal and the next foal , you let it grow with a young Boy and it will let him sit on top of it , in Mongolia the Jockey are mostly young boys
Is it at all possible that horse riding started in the Indus valley . Researchers have indicated that for the spread of the Indo European languages , horses were the means of covering vast amounts of territory. Therefore mobility could only be achieved by the utilization of horses. I am looking forward to the responses.
@@phillipmaasdorp9491 The hierarchy is bones leather as Wappen meat and milke as food than pulling carring for transport and ad the last came horse riding .The ratio soldier/horse never got ander 4/1 like in ww 2 so I know
The best riding lessons l ever had were learning to sit and stay on the horse without stirrups or reins. The instructor guided the horse on a lunge line while I learned balance, keeping my heels down, my arms out to the sides for balance and my eyes fixed between the horses ears. Once you learn how to keep your balance staying on the horse at speed was easy. But it was a lot of work to learn.
I have to put my two bits in. As a kid on the prairies, maybe nine to ten years old, I rode and loved a horse that I rode everywhere with nothing but touch, love, and a halter. My girl would lower her head so I could put my foot in the loop of the halter rope, then raise her head and let me slide down her neck to her back. Don't discount those kind of bonds in prehistory. Notice that modern humans make pets of some of the animals that they raise for slaughter...that is not a thing of civilization but profoundly old.
This is fascinating. Came across it while looking for information on medieval jousting. I didn't realize that the practice of riding horses can be traced back to about 2 or 3 thousand years ago. That's practically a recent development.
i recon they must have been riding earlier than drew states , homer in the 8th bc talks about the centaurs from an ancient past prospective. i dont think the neo/bronze age steppe people were doing cavalry charges but using horse for mobility ,out flankes etc . any military advancement normally ends in victory. the advance of the beaker into europe and end of neolithic culture suggests an advantage more than a bronze axe would give , poss advanced archery or the horse or both . although plague in neo societies prior to the beaker couldve also lead to the cultural and genetic replacement that happened.
The selective spread of Y haplogroups, and the inclusion of mitochondrial genoms suggests warfare, instead of a plague, unless it is a sex selective plague...
Growing up in Romania’s country side we had kids riding on the backs of horses without any kind of saddle or equipment. They would also ride them very very fast
Personally I think that the early steppe peoples would have used horses to move to and from raids rather than fight from horse back, I remember reading that naitive american tribes when they first got the horse did a similar thing before they got the hang of fighting from horse back
Ancient Mongolians used horses to fight with. They used bows and arows to fight while riding them.They were famous for doing so. As a matter of fact,one of the most famous Horse people were the Scythians.
@@oduffy1939 His comment was this,in part:: "Personally I think that the early steppe peoples would have used horses to move to and from raids rather than fight from horse back." The part about the Native Americans is the part that was much later than what I was saying. I was also simply adding to his comment,not attempting to refute it.
I watch a lot of historical content, and I'd say you're easily one of the best. You have a wonderful voice and your diction is flawless. You make it a pleasure to learn about these ancient societies. My thanks.
You can ride a horse with a halter and reins made a Baler twine, I've done it. So there wouldn't necessarily be any hard pieces to the first horse tack that would become archeological remains of the first bridles is quite possible. The bit itself could likely came about later.
My first horse as a child and young adult was to ride my mare with just a halter and lead rope around our large pasture. I'd be grooming her then too lazy to go back and get her bridle so I'd take the lead rope and tie it on the other side to make a long loop then throw it over her head for a pair of reins and exercise her for a short while. For riding, I used a hackamore with her (which has no bit). I now use a bosal on my current horse. A bosal is made from rawhide. All those options would show no sign of riding on horses' teeth. Personally, I prefer bitless options.
I think I take something of a middling position in terms of the Yamnaya riding horses into Europe: using horses in warfare =/= fighting your opponents from horseback. I agree with Drews that some random steppe herder on horseback wouldn't be a particularly big combat multiplier for them in a face-to-face fight. But I wouldn't discount the value of mobility when it comes to the type of warfare that would have been happening in the EBA. The Yamnaya probably used horses much as early modern dragoons, ride up to the fight before dismounting to do the fighting. And keep in mind that there would have been little in the way of 'pitched battles' during the centuries long, decentralized movement into Europe. Most 'warfare' would have consisted of endemic skirmishing and cattle rustling. Where that sort of 'dragoon' fighting style would have been a massive combat multiplier, without a single herder having to ever needing swing an axe from horseback.
I wonder how it would affect overall the Kurgan hypothesis, if the Kurgans were in fact not those aggressive horse-riders, but rather just fancied horse meat and were really good husbandmen
Yeah Anthony points out mechanisms that could have resulted in steppe dominance other than waves of pure violence. Some people would like to find multiple massacre sites before they believe it was conquest by systemic violence.
@@DanDavisHistory Well, Horseriders were first to get iron, and whole Celtic was inspired by them. Also, By some sources, Scythians were botch very warior-like and somewhat pacefule, by achemenid standards.
My guess is that horse riding developed after seeing people ride oxen. We see Rock Art in the Sahara of people riding oxen and some South-African Tribes like the Khoi-Khoi and Xhosa also rode oxen into battle. So I think Neolithic Europeans also used oxen for riding on occasion. Horse Milk residue was found on human teeth from the 3rd Millennium BC. somewhere in the Black Sea Steppe. So again not a massive jump from milking cows to milking horses. Same with pulling carts or a travois. Cattle basically served as blueprint for what can possibly be achieved by using the horse.
Have you got a source for the battle oxen in South Africa? Everything I have seen on warfare in the region records them both as fighting on foot, and riding oxen into battle would have been remarkable, so likely to be recorded and commented on.
I believe the riding oxen into battle is apocryphal. People have been riding oxen here in Africa for millennia, but what use would an ox be in battle? Ox-back archer? I think Europeans saw people riding oxen like horses and then assumed they used them in other ways horses are used, as in battle.
@@philipgeyer926Not apocryphal at all. They used oxen in this manor to charge horses of the Vryburgers and with some success were able to injure some horses. Basically used as a shock tactic but not extensively afterwards in battle. Gaan kyk maar na een van die frescoes in die Voortrekker monument.
@@SigurdVolsunga Voortrekker Monument. I do not have a better source than the Frescoe but I read it in a book many years ago about this so have to go look where I read it.
Question. Can't the increased mobility be explained by the horse being used for transporting goods, not by humans riding them? Like a mule or donkey, after all the horses back then were at the size of a donkey. As a hiker I knew it's quite easy to move far distances on foot, just given enough time. The problem is moving everything you need with you. Both trade and migration requires the movement of a lot of items and goods, and to me that seems more important than moving humans. Humans can move themselves; tents, clothes, weapons, tools and food cannot. This makes me kinda inclined to believe the late riding theory.
I enjoyed this video very much, as I have others of yours I stumbled across recently. I' have read Anthony's book and find it very compelling, especially because he is willing to consider different hyphotheses along with sifting through a lot of evidence. You do that too, and I value that highly; also that you give your references so generously. Granted, that only encourages my dreadful book buying habit, but there are worse habits. I like your view that the early horse riding was simply hanging onto the mane. That's a solution to how people were able to herd horses, which are so much faster than cattle and sheep, and also better at self-defense. And, it would make it likely that people would not slaughter the biggest, strongest and most biddable horses, but rather keep them, and allow them to breed..
All the experts have one thing in common. Opinions, opinions that cannot be proven right or wrong. If incontrovertible evidence comes forward, it will still be questioned by experts. You sir are an amazing story teller. I am happy you have found your purpose. Insurance sux. I was agent for 20 years and hated it.
Apparently, people who are much more experienced equestrians than I have confirmed that bareback horse ridding is not only possible, but common. In that case, it might be that the use of horses as battlefield cavalry was a later development than most people thought, but none the less, I would imagine the ability to ride horses would enable a roving tribe of conquerors a much greater mobility advantage over their enemies, even if the horse was simply a means of transportation between battles and sieges.
There is also the issue of viewing horse riding in terms of warfare as only fighting from horseback, we know of a plenthora of troops throughout history who did not fight on horseback but travelled on a horse but fought on foot. The mere notion of being able to transport and deploy your soldiers to one place or the other and then have them fight on foot was a massive advantage by itself, and possibly predated fighting directly from horseback by centuries, if not millenias.
Thanks for doing this video. Ironically, I recently read The Horse, The Wheel, and Language because I was looking into the The Indo European Question when I was confronted by the excessive detail in this book, realizing right away I had to read, reread and read again various chapters in this book. Additionally,I just discovered the book from Robert Drew's about Indo European Militarism and saw his book Early Riders in my additional research into this topic. So, I really appreciate your videos helping to guide me on what books I should read. I look forward to watching everything you've posted so far to compare your reading suggestions and the information you've discussed in your videos to what I've covered on my own, thus far. I'm happy I've been on the right track!
I enjoyed your video. To me it seems likely that riding for transport came earlier (helps explain the vast geographical expansion of the Indo Europeans) but the riding for warfare came later with chariot riding coming first. What interests me is the analogous role of donkey domestication which occurred in Africa and I believe explains the spread of the Northern Afroasiatic languages in North Africa and the Fertile Crescent. Donkey domestication facilitated long distance trade and allowed for the development of pastoralism in semi arid areas. Equids have played an amazing role in human history.
Well,yes they are. However you need to learn balance for both though. First you need to learn to ride,then to use weapons,then to learn to use them together. Ancient Mongols did both,..on the run.
Excellent video by the way. I grew up around geologists and archeologists. Played in the trenches of archeological site near Fort Ticonderoga at tender age. Rodgers rangers winter fort site. Fossil hunted in Poricy Creek and found 32, 60 million yr old shark teeth and a sawfish tooth. Fascinating discipline. Maybe that's where my insatiable interest in history started.
Look for signs of riding in the bones of the riders and any artifacts related to riding. There is a video of the oldest trousers discovered in Kazakhstan and go from there
Funy tho sad, that non-academic people are forced to go around and rediscover what was well documented before, bocouse of limited availibility of sources in public domain.
Hmm...I tend more to favor the earlier version for a couple of reasons. 1) It's easier to train a horse to ride than pull any form of a wagon. 2) The damage done by a horse acting up while pulling a wagon is going to be far greater than just falling off one. 3) The harness needed for a horse to pull a wagon is a fairly complex piece of craftsmanship. Far more complex than the bridle used to ride one. 4) Taking the step from riding a horse and using a horse to fight from is a major evolutionary step that takes time, and honestly doesn't need to have been taken for centuries, even millennium. Also the last cavalry during WWII used their horses just to travel from point A to point B. Why wouldn't the first have done the same? I would say that it sounds logical to me that horses were first ridden with no intent on doing more than travel quicker. Then came the travois, only later someone came up with the idea to put wheels on a travois. And, as far as no evidence of bits, I've known trained horses that could not take one without getting infection. They're really not that necessary, American Indians rarely used a bridle with any kind of a bit. I also feel that the final say should be an evolutionary genetic evaluation, that can determine how long it took for the domestication. So far, either could be right, or both wrong. They are both just hypotheses.
Very good observations. I have to agree with you and maybe add the migration of the Tocharians across the entire Khazak steppe as possible further evidence. Such a journey would require enormous mobility and the ability to scout ahead of the group to asses dangers and to find routes of travel. It's interesting to note that the Botia culture began domestication around the time of the Tocharian migration to the Altai.
That I can agree with. Though not as old, some of the Tarim mummies (Tocharian) wore britches. Which is a clear evidence of only being needed if riding horses for longer periods of time. (And, those britches weren't leggings, rather very complex and detailed, designed especially for riding a horse.) That could show evidence of riding being already well advanced as far back as 3800 years ago.
4)Mounted combat is likely older than X ce. BC. by asocietion witch Kimmerian culture. And, if Chineese sources are to be belive (doutably) it could be older than XX ce. BC.
Agree, (+/-) 1,000/2,000 B.C. is far too late. There isn't enough time for the evolutionary trial and error to have taken place. Things just don't pop up out of nowhere. It takes time, lots of time. (Our PoV is too skewed by the modern day ability to produce a massive amount of development within a short time.)
"Chariots first" idea assumes that the wheel preceded horse riding. I'm not sure about that. Having a herd of pack animals, who can pull primitive sleds seems like a major improvement to mobility. Suddenly you don't need to carry all your belongings on your own back. 1. Taming and herding first. 2. Domestication. 3. Utilization as pack and draft animals. 4. The wheel, once it's absolutely obvious, because you do have a bunch of draft animals already. Where horse-riding comes into this picture? I don't know, really.
That’s counterintuitive. Without domesticated livestock, there was more selective pressure for humans to be innovative. Why do think the cultures belonging to [the relatively petite] Neolithic West Eurasians were so much more sophisticated (e.g. stratified, urban, and agricultural) than those belonging to the [physically larger, more robust, and better adapted] Western Hunter-Gatherers that preceded them? For the same fundamental reasons that caused Cro-Magnon man to be intellectually and technologically superior to Homo neanderthalensis.
@@thebrocialist8300 west eurasians needed to band together to support their irrigation systems, eurasian herders did not need any of that, so they had much lower population density and hence less inovation
@@thebrocialist8300 Both early agrarians and early pastoralists went through a period of misery during their transition to a new lifestyle. The agrarians had very poor diet. Mostly grains, very little meat (no domesticated animals), most of vegetables were not domesticated, etc. They suffered accordingly. Similarly, pastoralists went through similar hardship when they started to rely on milk in large quantities. Lactose intolerance is still the norm among humans, so it definitely was for them too. Those who couldn't digest milk well, simply suffered. Apparently, it can be seen in their remains. Which lifestyle has more favorable selection toward innovation? It's probably settled lifestyle, simply because it allows for amassing wealth. Excess food production creates niches, which allow for new inventions that fit those new environments, but I'm not sure that the selection pressures are easy to distinguish. Plenty of important innovations came from the steppes. Definitely domestication of many animals, quite possibly the wheel, lots of cultural traditions (Zoroastrianism, Vedic religions), composite bow, probably more. Settled lifestyle allows for specialization, nomadic lifestyle encourages trade and exchange of ideas. Which one was more selective toward innovation? I simply can't tell. Eventually the issue totally disappeared, as pastoralism became a part of settled agriculture. Ever since it happened, it's a moot point.
For years I rode without a bit, only a bosal (a firm nose loop that when you pull on, pulls the head down and cuts off air if you keep pulling), I rarely pulled on the bosal as my horse responded to 'neck' reining (he was a stallion, old stock Appaloosa) and body posotion. When I first started riding it was bareback with a halter, then I used a snaffle, then switched to the bosal as it gave good control...as for saddles, most of my friends and I rode bareback, or with a bareback saddle (a pad with stirrups), or Western. The thing is, I broke/trained more then ten horses to neck rein with a soft snaffle bit or no bit and never had control issues...I don't think 'bits' were part of horse tack until quite a bit late to the game and more for those who are afraid of horses or who didn't grow up on them. As for Przewalski's horse, I'm really confused, the horse was bred 'back' to the ancient traits, I had books and articles on the breeding program, so of course there is modern DNA. How can that knowledge just have vanished? My friend still has a book talking about the breeding programs to create Przewalska's Horse...and now that work is forgotten? What's next, the confusion over how modern Chickens appeared? How laying hens magically lay more eggs then Wild Jungle fowl? How about wool production in sheep -- hint, wool production does NOT occur in wild sheep like in tame wool sheep (they shed, never produce the amount that sheep bred for wool production does, and the strands are never as long). We are losing too much information... I get that 'facts are bad' is the modern belief, but really, I recently heard a woman complaining because her doctor argued with her that there is no cure for stomach ulcers and no one knows what causes them -- here in CANADA! In a modern Western city hospital! ...she had to show him on her phone, explain about the bacteria, AND demand an antibiotic, which she had to name... (I get he is most likely a ghoul (someone who makes a living of the suffering and death of others -- more suffering, more drugs) and the drugs he wanted her to take she'd have to take for life -- according to him -- and he'd make money every time she refilled her prescription... I find this loss of basic knowledge scary...
Excellent work! Highly informative and concisely presented. For the record, I'd be fascinated to watch athat "History of the Chariot" video you mentioned in passing. :)
NEW VIDEO ON 2021 HORSE DOMESTICATION STUDIES: Watch my video based on the latest research now: ua-cam.com/video/dYw8NnQ1tpk/v-deo.html
Thanks for watching. If you enjoy this video you will like my other videos on history and prehistory so check them out here:
People of the Bronze Age Playlist: ua-cam.com/play/PLUyGT3KDxwC8u4jG_tOjN-8-bsHxucUxn.html
Bronze Age Warfare Playlist: ua-cam.com/play/PLUyGT3KDxwC8xD2S2Q1IqH_S_ocWwXWHv.html
Medieval History Playlist: ua-cam.com/play/PLUyGT3KDxwC_Jh59Fp5aU5Fzj0oUXUkEJ.html
I would not say it's a niche topic. Horse domestication is one of the fundamental events of human history.
You did a great job explaining the two main theories.
I can think of two reasons for riding a horse either on the hip or at the withers. If you look at an equine skeleton you will see that the vertebrae over the centre back have bony protrusions sticking upwards (called spinous processes) where ligaments and muscles attach. These upward-pointing spikes make riding without a saddle very uncomfortable. However, they get smaller at the base of the neck and over the hips. Another reason could be that earlier horses which had not been selectively bred were quite weak in the middle. Cave paintings depict horses with very straight backs which would not have had the elasticity conferred by the more curved back of the modern horse. Of course, it could also mean that the spinous processes were larger and even more uncomfortable than they are today.
The way I was taught in university was that the early Indo Europeans used chariots as horses at the time were too small to be ridden on and only once horses reached larger sizes due to selective breeding. The first large scale of horse back riding was in Assyria in the iron age. At least that's what they taught us 20+ years back.
Certainly was a game changer, along with making fire, space flight, atom bomb, and gene sequencing. (Horse domestication)
Hi Dan - I would like to take the opportunity to thank you for your great content, I really appreciate it!
The bronze age is the epoch when our modern world started to form, in its best and worst aspects.
Sometimes I think that I'm suffering what one could call "epoch dysphoria" - the wish to have lived in another time when the world was "more magical" and everything was meaningful, when a voyage of one hundred kilometers was a (potentially life-threatening) adventure but there were also no borders and you could be in the wilderness for weeks without finding any hint of other humans.
But I'm also not naive and aware that it is easy to romanticise these times from our modern perspective, times when families died of starvation because the winter was a little longer than expected, a man of 40 years was considered old and women were considered legitimate loot in warfare.
People were more free and less free as we are today at the same time. Strange.
I think the “experts” might not have enough experience with horses. Riding without saddle & bit is not an impossibility. Doing so with skill & speed is something I’ve witnessed children do. Certainly, growing up with your foal and learning young creates a friendship between rider & horse. This bond is mutually affectionate. In that circumstance, the rider using legs only to control their horse while using weapons is easy enough. Of course no evidence of that is likely to be found
A friend of mine used to work in a jousting show and had ridden since childhood, he tells me good riders direct more with their knees than their bridles.
@@SigurdVolsunga Exactly
@De Alvarado Which Spanish chronicles? I doubt those indigenous dwarves could even mount a horse during most of the Spanish imperial period.
@@thebrocialist8300 Man what a disagreeable racist individual you have to be. Sometimes I think people are generally kind and good, and then people like you come along….
At the same time, though, the modern horse has been bred to be a riding animal. So it is not clear that analogies from modern horses capture all the difficulties of riding early domesticated horses.
I think it is a mistake, to assume that the bit is the only way to control a horse. Spanish riding traditional uses what is called a hackamore. A woven strip of rawhide encircles the horses muzzle. Pressure on the muzzle, controls the horse.
In modern times, the people of Mongolia ride horses very similar to ancient horses. Very short, and very stocky. The argument that short and stocky horses would not be an advantage, is somewhat ridiculous.
Training a wild horse, without the use of a previously trained horse, is nigh impossible. However, if a young foal were captured, after the killing of its mother, it would be quite easy to train that horse. Very much in the same way that wolf puppies we're probably trained, to be domestic companions.
I think that modern archaeologists have a tendency to belittle the abilities of ancient peoples. It is important to remember that they were every bit as smart as we are. To say that early peoples were not capable of doing what we do all the time, shows a tremendous amount of hubris. If they were eating horses, they had access to foals. If they had access to foals, then they had access to rideable mounts.
Personally, I believe that domestication occurred very early. However, archaeological proof of such domestication would be unlikely to survive. This is why we have not found walrus skin boots, from ancient times. But that's another topic, entirely.
Enjoyed the video. Keep it up
Thank you. And I appreciate your insights - you're right, much of what our ancestors did will not show up in the archeology.
You are 100 percent correct, just like archaeologists claimed that Ancient Man selected the wolves with little fear for humans that followed the camp, no they didn't they took puppies and the puppies had no fear of humans because they are pack animals same thing with horses oh, they killed and ate the adult and raised the foal which had no fear of human
You are my kind of man! I read this thinking, I might as well have written it - including the opinion on archaeologists. 👍🏻 however what I meant to comment myself is, I wonder if there aren't any ancient legends on taming the horse. As with the archaeologists (these poor people's careers can be ruined if they dared speculate as we can!), we also underestimate the ancient legends. I started believing in them when I read about the discovery of Celtic burial in the Bull's Rock cave in Moravia. There had been legends (by the word of mouth) about men in white robes and fire and yelling and moaning... when they excavated the cave, the burial was 3.5 thousand years old! So if a legend can survive that long, why not ten thousand? Ok, and the reason why I wonder is that a domestication of horse was done by "the people", but taming of first horse was done (possibly) by one person, and then the whole tribe learned the skill. And such person gets a special place in legends, and possibly even supernatural powers. So I'd be researching the tales of the folks in the likely areas where the horses were tamed. That could give us surprising clues. Just looking at the Epona story is interesting: why is a woman associated with horse godess? Isn't it showing the special relationship we see today (most of the members of any youth horse club are girls)? What if the first horse tamer was girl? Also, how old is the Epona worship? Can we assume that before becoming a deity some three thousand years ago, there could be centuries of more detailed legend that are now lost? Why should we assume that Epona cult started suddenly, without prior history before becoming a cult? Can we not guess the age of the story by researching the variations of Epona and horse names in various indoeuropean languages? We know "equus" (q changed to P in some Celtic languages), we have "pony", in my native Czech we have "kůň", which is obviously from the same origin, the possibilities are many.
@@zenolachance1181 and they no doubt put their kids up on the backs of the horses as a game...
@@peterkratoska3681 I've seen the video on feral dog but that is not wolves 60000 years ago when wolves would have been a serious threat to humans although I have been looking into toxoplasmosis in animals making them less aggressive toxoplasmosis may have led to domestication of many animals. I don't know if anyone is studying this but it is an interesting topic
As a rider of dressage, I can readily see where riding a horse bareback without saddle or bridle would be extremely easy given
time to adjust the body to relax and give "signals" through the seat bones and legs. I often rode my horse without saddle or bridle and found that by turning my torso, moving my legs back or forward, would cause my horse to turn or stop depending on pressure of my upper thigh or lower leg. Even turning my shoulders would cause change of direction. All is dependent on the rider's relaxation or minute tension, and going with the horses movement. I suspect early man would have wanted to move with the speed of a running horse at some time or another and would have eventually tried to get on the back of a horse just to go fast. I suspect all this happened much earlier than scientists believe as the curiosity of the human is far stronger than most believe.
Hi Suzanne, I too ride with legs and balance, and no need at all for bridles and saddles on a well trained horse. :)
I primarily ride/event/show/etc my horses bareback and bridleless due to my Ehlers Danlos Syndrome causing the slight tension from saddles and reins to dislocate my joints. It's not overwhelmingly difficult/impossible to communicate with your horse without aids; as long as you spend time with it, working on bodily control, and approach it with a "I'm with you as a partner, not here to micromanage you" attitude. It's definitely not out of the realm of possibility that they did the same back then in order to ride horses.
@@KickAssCowgirl27 You go, girl!
The first human to ride a horse must have been a badass. It probably took a long time for this to be a normal practice and even longer to be widespread but it happened everywhere horses are which is most of Eurasia.
@@KickAssCowgirl27 the American Plains Indians had no experience of horses till the Spanish brought them back in the 14th century- yet the Apache were renowned as the greatest light cavalry. They weren't much for saddles either. Fr
I once rode a horse bareback without reins or hackamore inside a fenced area, his name was Dandy who was also blind in one eye. We connected and as we walked around the pasture, he responded to my hand touch and leg pressure…I was holding onto his mane above his shoulder…. He was awesome. My three favorite horses were Dandy, Dixie and Tony, all unique individuals, all a joy to ride and I connected with all of them and many times I rode bareback as well, so it is possible to ride a horse without tack of any kind, but the connection between horse and rider is a must gift for this ability, besides including kindness, a sincere understanding and a deep respect is a must between horse and rider. These horses were NOT mine, they belonged to someone else, but they let me ride them. I still think about them often. I’m 74 now, and unable to ride horses anymore, and of which I do greatly miss. 👍❤️🙏🏼
As a horsewoman and behaviourist, your account of equine hierarchy, herd structure and behaviour in such a succinct and informed way is one of the best I have ever heard.... from history or indeed from any horse behaviourist or trainer! Brilliant 👏
I think that the role of children in the development of riding has been ignored. If captured ponies were being used as pack animals or to pull travois, it would not be long before they were used to carry small children, in the same way that burros and asses are commonly used. Everywhere in agricultural societies, you see children astride a variety of domesticated animals (my Philipino nephew was riding water buffalo practically from birth). I suspect that this practice familiarized the horse with the human and the human with the horse in such a way that older and older children remained on the horses until they began to direct them autonomously, rather than just being carried as baggage.
What I think too. I rode our farm cows before my dad finally got me a horse.
Perhaps by accident. A father picking up his tired son on a long journey,and sitting him atop a horse carrying supplies maybe.
@@xScooterAZxPerhaps so. But why is it hard to imagine tough, bold kids playing with fierce horses ? People today have no clue what free kids are like. My father drove the farm truck (Model A Ford) to town on errands as soon as he could reach the pedals, and hunted with a 4 10 shotgun when he was 9. In many parts of the world it was the role of boys to guard the pasturing herds from large predators.
@@mondopinion3777 Did I say it was hard? No,I didnt. I simply was thinking of how a child might be tired and his Father picking him up and sitting him on a horse. Why does that bother you? Tough,bold,kids with fierce horses?
I know the horses my Dad would buy me at auction were always fierce. Half broken so they were bought in bulk cheaply,..and I didnt have any tack,just a rope around their bottom jaw to ride with. He got me 5 in an auction one time. I had to work those horses every day after school.
Oh,and I am old enough to remember living in Hungry Horse Montana and going out on my pony cart to get our Milk cannister,which was about 2 1/2 feet high. and taking it home. I'm quite old,and remember doing manual labour type chores. Chopping wood,and stacking it in the barn,etc. So what's your point about your father riding a bike and hunting. Most people I know from my generation know how to do those things. I had my first rifle when I was 5 years old.
My Dad had a Model A,..I have photos of him it it too :}
@@xScooterAZx We are much alike then. You should understand what my point is. (but I said my dad was driving a truck, not a bike, to town.) These academic theorists make me irritated with their testosterone-driven stress on war in the domestication of horses, and so do the lame comments by sheltered folk who overprotect their kids and cannot conceive what free kids are like. I thought you were one of them. Sorry.
I grew up on a farm, and had the whole list of animals. My siblings and I attempted to ride literally every one of them that looked like it could support our weight. Pigs, goats, cows, even the neighbors llama. Granted we also had horses, so there's a strong chance that knowing riding might be a possibility inspired us to attempt it in the first place. I can't help but feel early man did the same thing. :D
I agree with many people in this comments section pointing out that horses were likely taken in at very young ages, likely after the death of the parental guardian. They were raised in environments where they never developed, or quickly conquered their fear of man. Even today, you can find examples of this all over the world in the most unlikely places: Pet lions and tigers, bears, chimpanzee's, the list is extremely long.
And with that I have to echo what I said above. Those early humans definitely looked at those horses that they could now interact with and thought, 'I wonder if I can ride that thing'. They likely took turns, and it likely turned into sport, and I'm sure they quickly thought up ways to improve the experience. This attitude, this behavior, is what it IS to be human in large part: Curious tool users.
Great video, really enjoyed!
That is exactly my thought on it, great comments! 🐎🙋Lisa Rae Rousseau🐎
I’ve known children whose family had really big dogs like 115 pounds And the kids ride the dogs till they were about 10
Find a copy of 'Real Horses Don't Say Oink' by Patrick McManus.
@@Snoriffej Yeah bud did you read all about that in a video you watched in the suburbs. Any other first hand experience you care to pass along?
As well, I am sure the ancients would have seen birds or small animals climb on the backs of a horse laying down.
It just isn't a far stretch to think that a person then would approach a subservient mare laying down and try to get on it's back.
I am also in agreement with the idea of children connecting with foals and establishing a bond leading to riding the horse.
I wonder if anyone has tried tracing the centaur myths to their origins. I always imagined they were the result of the first mounted warriors attacking a village or people that hadn’t seen horses before or at least never seen someone ride one. “Man they came out of no where big 4 legged animals with human torsos attached to them and just started killing us!!”
Interesting, I never thought of it that way before!
The Aztec at first thought that Cortez's horsemen were animals with two heads. So, it's easy to see the concept of the centaur being a folkloric survival of the encounter with horse riding nomadic peoples.
Well, it was likely made by tales of people that stambled upon Kimmerians or scytchians before big greak colonization.
Yes whole papers have been written on it.
@@jozefkozon4520 Yes, I also heard somewhere that the myth of the centaur could have been derived from tales of the Scythians.
I have watched modern Lakota in South Dakota ride bare over hilly terrain back using the manes to hold onto. Their relatives did so too with only a couple centuries experience with horses. I have also watched amazing horse riding acrobatics in Hungary where only simple harnesses were used. It is easy to conclude that ancient nomadic cultures probably had even greater knowledge and skill from a millennia of living with their 4 legged companions.
that said, these early horses were still at the advent of their development, genes that gave them stronger backs, longer legs, better heart endurance, easier trainability is still just developing which makes it all the more impressive
The Comanche were weak and beat on tribes , until the Horse 🐎 then became one of the strongest people in North America
I'm also living in Parkston South Dakota where are you in the state?
Horses were introduced to the Americas (and the Native American people) by the Spanish in the late 1400s. They did know about saddles. However, it was just simpler to not use them. I also prefer no saddle or bridle depending on the horse.
Hello Dan,
There was a very interesting documentary on the invention of trousers done by the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut a couple years ago (uploaded to youtube). They posited that the development was necessitated by horse riding. The artifact that was being analyzed was a pair of the oldest known trousers of 2,500 years ago. They were found in a burial site that also had a whip and bridles. It was found in the Tarim basin in East and Central Asia. Worth watching.
Tarim is in Central Asia.
Wow! Thank you for sharing!!!
Yep. The Tocharians, evidence of that in Ukraine 6k yrs ago, as well.
The first horsemen were the kids that raised the little foal, with the help of several of the old tribe elders. They played with it, used it to help them gather firewood and other items.. As the colt grew, and several of the youngsters managed to learn to ride it, the young horse and rider began scouting for the tribe, accomplishing in hours, what would otherwise have taken days. Thus the value of the young horse and rider was understood beyond question. Similarly, paleo kids were probably the first to use flattened frozen hides/skins as play to slide down snowy slopes and hills.. Huge fun and learning experience.
I can see early man killing a mare…..and the scared foal hung around. Plus, it smelled its mom on them.
While old enough to eat grass, it was still attached to mom. So it follows the hunters home because the rest of the herd is long gone.
Initially confused, the hunters laugh this off as a snack following it home. Making for a easy kill later on.
Well, the foal hangs around, at out of loneness decides to hang around a younger non aggressive human for companionship.
This human child may be the kid of a high ranking clan member, so the parent tells the other hunters to leave the foal be for now, since it makes his kid happy.
Well, you know kids. They love climbing on things. Ever see them with a dog?
After a few months, the kid and foal get really attached. The foal grows, and the kid likes the crawl on it.
The now older horse is kind of a quiet omega animal, so it decides it’s better to put up with these scary humans, then being alone. Plus, one human feeds it treats sometimes and keeps nasty predators away.
Well, one day, the kid fully sits on the young horses back. Horse crow hops a few times, turns its head, sniffs, and decides to just keep grazing.
Kid is initially just thrilled with that.
But seeing the horse move around, and even run he starts to get an idea.
He teaches the horse how to respond to a rope(pressure) on the ground (so it won’t wonder off either).
He fashions a crude halter, gets on its back, and applies pressure with the halter and legs for the young horse to move.
Horse, initially startled, decides to do what the “alpha” is telling it do do.
After some trial and error, he is able to ride around, maybe even putting a leather thong around the neck, or a crude blanket on the horses back for grip.
This definitely got the tribes attention, and the young ladies swooning at the sight.
This of course gets the other guys attention. They want to impress the ladies too.
Perhaps they catch other young horses after a hunt and try to copy the first guy.
A few succeed and other uses for horses for hunting , travel, warfare, scouting, and packing goods is quickly discovered.
I am convinced a young man or kid was the first to get on a horses back, and impressed the adults.
I feel like these academics have never actually rode on a horse. That should be a requirement in order to fully understand what they are theorizing.
I'm reminded of the idea that you couldn't use a lance on horseback as a shock trooper before the invention of stirrups. Then some people tested it and found out that you could even use a lance on horseback without the benefit of any sort of riding gear. Instead the stirrup probably better enabled melee on horseback, making it so a fighter could extend his reach by using his legs to regain his balance and make it that much harder for footmen to dehorse him.
@@derrickbonsell there is a saddle that was used that allowed some degree of stability. I belive it was first used my the acheminid empire and then used by Alexander's cavalry.
But then you have evidence from the ancient world explicitly saying that. Xenophon says they couldn't strike with a spear from horseback without risk of falling off.
Yeah for some time historians believed the Roman saddle was of a soft leather kind until archeologists discovered actual surviving wood and leather roman saddles with the four horn tree design, enabling much more stability. The earliest saddles with hard pieces rather than only blankets and leather found so far are from about 500 BC I think on the eastern steppe.
@@DanDavisHistory They would have learned to strike with a spear on horseback just as they would have on foot. It's all about balance.
When I lived in New Zealand we would come across wild horses around a place called Waiouru, quite magnificent to see them running free, I have a Hungarian horse bow but alas as close as I've come to a wild horse in the UK was a Tesco's lasagna. 😬
The New Forest ponies aren't wild but they roam around and it's lovely seeing them walking about free beneath the trees.
How about the ghostly sights of a giant moose in the fog..on the south island in N.Z...i think south island..I read about Theodore Roosevelt bringing them there..but very rarely seen if at all..but I only read such news and know not from truth or false..
@@tashaarellano7680 I've not seen a moose in New Zealand, and done plenty of hunting in my time with rifle and bow there. I would surmise that it was a fiordland wapiti which grow huge in size with massive antlers that was mistaken for a moose if one the person who 'spotted it' was unfamiliar with moose or maybe the wapitis antlers were covered in undergrowth giving a moose like appearance, I've seen plenty of moose in Scandinavia and I could understand the mistake. That been said there are some strange tails of unaccountable creatures sneaking around in the depths of some of those dark forests in the South Island. I've learnt not to write off any accounts from tails of the forests as I have personally witnessed time itself stop and have myself and a friend stand in limbo for what must have been hours, a life changing experience with no explanation.
I used to see them when training in the Waiouru area.Way back in the early 1980's.
@@terryharris1291 at least at night you could hear the horses clip clop when they came up on your hole to give you a sniff, not so with the Maori sergeants , sneaky mofos
Hit it Brother
ua-cam.com/video/Bto47Lq7sCs/v-deo.html
Love horses and how they played a role in our history. RIP to all the horses that died in battle
Big Role ! You can even see it in humans Body structures , Mongolian, and others , short legs long upper body - my ancestors 600 years on horse back 🐎
I didn't know male horses have canine teeth . My gosh , I am 62 yrs old and still learning new things and more interested in learning than ever before in my life .
I've owned horses for 60 years. I can't remember more than a few mares that didn't have them. They are often removed because of the bit hitting them causing pain /infection
If Botai horses were not domesticated then we need not assume Przewalski's horses were ever domesticated since they descend from Botai horses. The big DNA paper looking at steppe horse DNA has been in the pipeline since 2018 and still isn't published but when it is out we will know for sure whether modern horse breeds descend from WSH horses and that will be very telling in regards to who domesticated them.
As for mounted warfare - i don't believe WSH used horses in battle either. I think they would be perfect for scouting and also as symbols of power to intimidate enemies though.
Yeah there's now no good evidence the Przewalski's ancestors were ridden but some researchers believe there was some domestication - herding or managing and milking. Although other evidence suggests they weren't even doing that. I dunno what Alan Outram reckons as of 2021. But loose management systems are extremely difficult to detect.
And for sure - a band of large men coming over the horizon riding horses slowly toward your village would have been absolutely baffling and horrifying. And it's quite possible that only a select few early people were "the riders" in their society. Experts at travelling distances rapidly. Hard to imagine that cultures where raiding was so central to their culture would not have taken advantage of it.
@@DanDavisHistory Amino acids preserved in Botai pottery confirm horse milk was used. This is proof of horse domestication for cattle-like purposes (milk and meat). Frozen Scythian remains preserve at least three versions of horse harnessing.
If you look at the Norwegian fjord horse, there is a lot of likenesses to the Przewalski horses. So much so, that there must have been breeding and domestication. By the way, how do you milk a horse without domesticating it?
@@PotPoet An interesting fact is that humans cannot consume horse milk, due to its high lactose content. However, horse milk's high sugar content means that it will ferment within 24 hours, to create airag or khumis. So, one wonders what was kind of horse milk was in the pottery? Alcohol wouldn't leave a residue, I suppose? Horse milk can be made into yogurt balls - qurt or kurut, a staple of all horse riding nomads. www.atlasobscura.com/articles/what-is-qurt
@@oduffy1939 Stupid question. If horse milk is to high lactose to drink, then how does consuming it in other ways also not have high lactose?
People I know who are lactose intolerant usually stay away from things like ice cream or other dairy products
Wouldn't the lactose remain to high, of it's to high to drink?
I ride bareback and without a bit all the time, you don't control a horse with a bit, you control them with their nose. Its not impossible to ride without. Maybe for someone who doesn't know horses. I also ride a dominant mare, the head mares are worth their weight in gold, she was search and rescue. Bought her for about 500$ and learned to ride on a dominant male gelding, and gentled the ex stud in my profile pic. I have some quams with the experts, I actually went to school for equine studies, and have lots of yeses and nos. I recommend looking up mustang makeover contestants if you really wanna learn about the wild ones. Bits also predate the wheel, riding did come first, I remember that test question in My equine history class very well. It was stirrups that were the HUGE game changer. Mongolia and Kahastekstan were the first to domesticate and did it around the same time. Many native tribes in rhe US favored mares for their overprotectiveness and willingness to defend their riders. Mares, and horses in general will lay down their life for you. Mules and donkeys, to the 11th degree. Even though we originally domesticated for food, they're mankind's most underrated and misunderstood MVP. Horses originated in North America, migrated, and died off, but continued to live everywhere else
You're right about the stirrup, which the Huns brought to Europe in the 5th century. About horses protecting the rider, Mongolian epic poetry and folklore always depicts the hero's horse as his faithful companion, who in the midst of battle fights alongside the hero. The horse also speaks to the hero and is often the one who exhorts the hero when he falters.
@@oduffy1939 thats beautiful
Denisovans might have been the first to domesticate horses tho
@@Yarblocosifilitico Horses got across the the Stepps by the same route the First Nations peoples were supposed to have gotten to North America - from what is now currently Alaska to Russia. That being the case, its likely the Mongolians were the first humans to see horses since they lived in the area.
@@Whistlewalk the Mongolians? really? Not even proto-Mongols, PIEs or Scythians? If we're only talking about 'seeing' horses, well, the Denisovans coexisted with some proto-horses about 24,000 years ago. I don't think the Mongolians can top that ;P
siberiantimes.com/science/casestudy/news/n0877-remains-of-extinct-zebra-like-horse-found-at-denisova-cave-home-of-ancient-man/
I guess Denisovans aren't technically 'humans', but still, plenty of ancient humans before the Mongolians. It's probably impossible to know which hominid saw horses for the first time. Horses might have gotten to the Americas through Siberia to Alaska but that doesn't mean they weren't roaming the rest of Eurasia long before that. Horses and hominids could've met for the first time pretty much anywhere in Eurasia.
I wouldn't be surprised if the first person to mount a horse, was a kid who mounted up on the back of their pet, because they didn't know any better. The horse trusted the owner, and the kid didn't weight too much to cause the animal pain and discomfort.
To a young boy there is nothing more natural (or fun) than getting on the back of a relatively tame horse. There are plenty of men (and women) walking around Texas who first sat on a horse when they were months old.
This is pretty much what happens in the book series I read about our early ancestors, Earths Children. The main girl has to survive on her own and stock up for winter. She makes a pit trap and traps a mare, kills it, ect, only to see it had a foal. She feels bad and takes it with her to care for, and by the time the foal grows up, it trusts her enough for her to get on its back, and was strong enough for the girl, who was small anyways in weight, to not hurt it.
Its an outdated story, admittedly, but it gives an interesting take on a couple domestication processes, the horse being a big one.
@Mel Hawk lol yea she did. Literally!
@Mel Hawk by the time I got to the last book, though, I had a strong Pandoras box vibe with her.
@Mel Hawk oh! I won't spoil it then. Just that yea...def got a Pandoras box vibe. Made me wonder if its actually where the myths began, from real people in our past who managed "extroadinary" things, for their time, and their stories being embellished through the centuries.
I have a horse who was a wild stallion. I ride with no bit and trained him initially without a saddle. My daughter jumps him bareback and bridleless. The bit is meant to be communication tool, not a control mechanism. It informs the head and shoulders while the legs inform the barrel and hind end.
Even if they weren't riding them into battle, I could easily see a band using them to get from point a to point b, then dismount to fight. Like Dragoons originally did during the 16th and early 17th centuries. Being able to move quickly on a horse from your camp to a fight had to be valuable in of itself or just lash the loot or supplies to the horse as you move along. Even if a cavalry charge wasn't a thing. I could easily see horses and horse riding being a valuable aspect of warfare during the Indo-European migration.
The detail on horse domestication in the Horse, the Wheel and Language was one of the best parts of the book.Domestication of the horse was the central most important basis for spurring the economy of the steppe people, from what I have read in this and other sources. I think it's what makes the steppe cultures so very fascinating. They were such innovators and this one thing changed the course of all of future civilizations. It's vital to the history of human civilization, so you need to devote enough time to sufficiently explore it.
Theay got Iron first. In X ce. BC.
Greetings from Canada
I think I watched this great little documentary a while ago, but this time thru I’m wondering if the debate about how migratory human populations controlled their horse herds during travel phases.
Maybe it was just something that didn’t come up, in the sense that the migratory routes were generations old, and the horses were recognized as being the best navigators of any one of a number of variations and detour necessitating events and obstacles?
One thing that is fairly unarguable is how much more confident arrogant presumptuous and fallible human beings are nowadays then they were ten thousand years ago.
The narrator almost gets to the point of introducing this type of theory by about minute 24 I think….
I lean towards the hypothesis that the first domesticated horses were used as pack animals, or for hauling sleds and later, carts. Horses at that time were too small to carry an adult human, and increasing their size took centuries of breeding. Evidence for this argument is that battle-carts and chariots ruled Mesopotamia and Egypt for centuries. They were used as mobile platforms for archers. They could not have dominated warfare for so long if horse-archers existed.
Adult humans at that time were much smaller too. The full ability to ride needed the invention of stirrups-which I believe the Mongols achieved.
They were not too small to carry adult humans. Look how stocky they are. A Shetland pony can carry a man!
So the first to tame horses were the mespotamians and egyptians
@@indramuhammad1942 No, horses were introduced into those regions long after the first civilisations formed. Horses were endemic on the plains and steppes much further North and East, and were an important food source for nomadic hunters.
The first people to domesticate horses were of the Botai culture, in the area around Kazakhstan. The domestication of horses began by using captured animals as draft-horses and for milk.
The invention of the wheel was the deciding factor in the spread of horses. Mesopotamians first used oxen or asses to haul 'battle-carts', but by 2,500 BCE they had adopted horses and chariots soon followed.
As a child, I rode horses bareback and used my knees and the horses' manes to transmit commands. I often use a halter instead of a bridle. I have seen people giving commands to horses with their feet while standing up on them and also using clucking sounds.
A wild horse can be trained for basic riding in less than a month. Surely modern horses, even wild ones, probably have traits selected over time by humans that makes training easier. I suspect, however, that those traits were always there in some horses.
While I doubted it until I saw it, there is the phenomenon of the horse whisperer. I wonder how that could have played into the domestication of horses to allow riding them. There's something special between some people and some horses.
I've never used more than a halter or rope around the horses neck
@@maggiethedruid9010 I'll bet you don't wear spurs, either. I haven't used them since I was about 12. Really, with a trained horse spurs aren't necessary, and I wouldn't use them today at any point in a horse's training.
I grew up with horses and even though I live in a city now, I've never stopped being fascinated by horses and I'm always researching and learning as much as I can about these incredible animals. This video taught me some super cool facts I didn't know, like stallions having evolved canines for fighting and those amazing cheek plates - just wow! I'm so appreciative!! Love your videos xo
Thanks for a great video and for having the humility to present the various theories in as fair a way as is possible, and without pretending to know things that probably nobody knows for sure.
I'd say that once horses started being domesticated for food that's when the riding began. It's a natural progression of human thought. Human wants to sit on rock, stone or log as opposed to ground. Here's a seemingly docile animal right next to me about hip height, I'll indulge my curiosity or your dare and see what happens if I do this.
About hip height? I had to climb in a tree to get on my horse bareback... I was only about four foot ten when I was 13
@@zenolachance1181 The horses referred to in this video and that I am referring to are pony sized or not much bigger than. You're speaking of modern horses, this video is not.
But, in the Orient, did prehistoric people **SIT ON A WOK**?...(ROFL)
@@CLASSICALFAN100 Lmao!
@@CLASSICALFAN100 I can't bring myself to clear this comment, it's just too funny!
Most people are not aware how cold resistant horses actually are: the breed of the turkic yakut/Sakha people in north-east siberia can deal with temperatures of -70°C/-94°F, being outdoors all the year - and winter lasts almost 9 month there. The yakut cattle is extremly resistant too - although it is less resilient than the horses and is usually brought to stables during winter occasionally cattle escapes into the wild and survives to the next spring.
I'm extremly fascinated by the yakut/Sakha who fled from the mongols to the north and adapted their typical turkic nomadic lifestyle to one of the harshest environments on earth.
Weren't the Yakut primarily a reindeer herding people, who also happened to have horses and other cattle? I understand they also ride reindeer.
@@oduffy1939
Yes, they are also reindeer herders - but so are the mongols. The republic of Sakha (yakutia) is a gigantic territory, the largest subnational region of the world and comparably big as the european union - so it depends where exactly you are. Further north yakutia is characterized by tundra where the reindeer which can live of mosses is the primary lifestock, further south the horse plays are role. The sakha/yakut migrated from regions further south to their lands to escape the mongols in the middle ages and took their horses with them. Their non-turkic neighbors who partly share their territory rely less on horse and cattle and are more specialized on the reindeer.
#51.
I think a good piece of evidence for the early riding hypothesis is the high value placed on horses by Yamnaya (and descendant peoples) who were mainly eating sheep and cows.
They were burying people with horse skulls and hides, had horse head shaped maces, and horse inscribed stones. Also the horse was very important ritually to the indo european peoples, with a common ritual significance shared by peoples whose ancestry split before the late horse riding hypothesis is dated to.
I was wondering about that. I can buy that maybe the spread of the Proto-Indo-Europeans was due to the mastery of cart/chariot technology rather than horseback riding, but it really surprised me to hear that there was nothing before the first millennium BC (not even in the Vedas?) that suggested a more intimate/"bums on backs" relationship between Indo-Europeans and the horses that seemed to be pretty important to them judging by the texts and legends that have come down to us and our ability to identify so many horse-related words of Proto-Indo-European by tracing existing cognates of later and even modern Indo-European languages back to common roots...
Actually it was the botai culture not the yamnaya and they were speaking uralic language. You can find the article on the pubmed by searching keywords.
@@ghostriderb.9914 no, it's debunked
I have been riding horses for over 50 years , I have een a jockey and broke in lots of horses and I agree with many of you , a horse has to learn how to be riding , and the bit is completly uselesss the fist month or so , and the saddle is not a most . the fact is that you don´t all this to teach a horse to be riden , he has to game trust in you to let you progressively sit on them
Please try again in English!
Gosh thoroughly enjoyed this. Thank you.
Back in the 1970's I used to work for a horse dealer (just north of London!) he would buy unbroken three year olds from local markets like Southall, Stow etc., and within a few weeks having gained their trust I could handle them eg brush, groom, pick out hoofs etc., get them used to traffic on a lead rope and back and bring them on for basic commands walk, trot canter etc., before they were sold on. Trust and kindness was everything and patience. I'd never heard of 'free riding' back then (without bridles and saddles) but there are plenty of vids about it here on UA-cam. This again is very much based on trust. I'm guessing this how how people may have ridden initially far more in tune and connected to the natural world including horses than many of us are now?
PS The men riding on this vid have appalling seats and are using the bits/ reins for balance. Horses heads are up and open trying to evade the pain. Terrible. Painful to watch.
The "chariot first" theory for warfare makes more sense to me. Trying to fight and control a large animal by yourself seems daunting. Having someone else drive leaves you free to shoot and throw. It is also a much shorter leap from wagons to chariots, than wagons to riding.
Wooden carts with wheels were most definitely just flopped on a horse and blam “chariot/wagon”
From what I've read about Sumerian chariots, they were rather slow moving cumbersome four wheeled vehicles drawn by onagers compared to the fast moving two spoke-wheeled Egyptian/Hittite chariots of the late Bronze Age. They were difficult to manuever and could only be made to charge into battle in one direction on flat grounds. The need to turn direction would've being difficult to achieve, while rocky ground would've been dangerous as it could knock the charioteers off their platform, or shatter the chariot's wheels or overturn the vehicle. It would've been intimidating for the mountain tribes that periodically invaded Mesopotamia who'dve been unused to the sight though, and as a result it would've been an effective psychological weapon.
@@bc7138 also you have terrifying option of just putting blades on your chariot and lighting it on fire suicide bombing the front lines of your enemy of course I mean that later on in history when horses could run a tad bit faster
A pulling horse takes 3 x the training of a ridden horse. With a wagon/chariot only the bit gives clues of what to do. A good horseman can ride with no bit, just using legs & body movement's to let the horse know what to do. Ever notice that troops pulling cannon always have at least one troop mounted when pulling. Not expert, but have trained a few horses to both ride & pull.
@@MrBobVick well then that means they must have had some really well trained horses then huh
I am Afghan and the word literally means "Horsemen" in Persian because the Sassanian knew we had the best breed of horses and were excellent breeders. The Proto-Indo Iranians (Aryans) are believed to be the first people to domesticate the horse in the Eurasian steppes, even the oldest chariots trace back to the Sinastha culture in Central Asia where they came from.
In Pashtun culture, horses are well revered.
Oh yes, one of my favourite poems, although I realize that it's as colonialist as all getout -- everyone kowtowed to the British or Kipling's poems wouldnt sell; it is still mainly a tribute to the horsemanship of the Afghan people. Rudyard Kipling's "The Ballad of East and West". He probably figured out how to celebrate Afghani's fantastic riding while making it look as though the British were really in control.
I have a big red and black Afghan carpet here with me, bought it at an auction.
Pashtuns are genetically belonging to indian origins?
@@vishvendrachauhan7267 No we are not Indian genetically but Indo-European. Our bloodline traces back to the steppes.
Chariot????
You means chart or wagons that already exist
+the best horse breed???
Hahaha that why the Persian breeds were Helpless with barb(in roman period) and Arabian horse in early meidival age
Also, especially since you mentioned the Comanche, early horse warriors could have used horses to transport themselves to the site of battle, dismount to fight, then remount and ride away, rather than fighting from the saddle like you see in later cavalry developments. The Comanche used horses in this way on their infamous raids rather than fight from the saddle, and this is possibly how horses were used early on
This is exactly wrong. Among the plains Indians it was only the Comanches who actually fought from the back of the horse. All the other goups such as Sioux and Apache would ride to battle on the horse and dismount to fight. The Comanches developed shooting from horseback to a high skill including what is now a rodeo trick of shielding the rider behind the horse's neck while shooting under it. The Comanches shot while riding using bows and arrows, but also with revolvers. The Texas Rangers picked up firing from horseback with pistols from the Comanches which became the Rangers' distinctive tactic including against the Comanches themselves.
@@haroldbridges515I'll do more research but I was under the impression that what you're suggesting is a common misconception.....Either way it's beside my point lol My main point being that this was how some horse cultures throughout time chose to fight, and it's likely that early horse people's would fight in this way especially given the size of early horses and the lack of specialist riding equipment. Whether it was the Sioux, Comanche, or British dragoons is neither here nor there but if Am spreading misinformation about the specifics of the culture I apologize
@@seanpoore2428 With respect to the historical Comanches, the question is not how they would fight, but how they did fight. It is not a matter of speculation.
My information came from "Empire of the Summer Moon" by S. C. Gwynne which is about the Comanches.
@@haroldbridges515 Ok......Comanches aside......Many OTHER groups of people DID fight from the saddle, and Many other groups of people DID fight by riding to their location, dismounting to fight on foot, then using the horses to make a quick getaway (often with loot or slaves). Both tactics Were used historically, even sometimes both being used concurrently within a single army. Dragoons would often dismount to fight like super mobile infantry while other cavalry fought from horseback without dismounting. However the who is MUCH less important in this case bc thats not what im pushing for. Whether it was one tribe or another doesnt change the core of my point bc it Was Done. The only speculation here is whether the ancient horse peoples of the neolithic did this before chariots or not. My assertion is that its a possibility. But again, if the mostly irrelevant Comanche point is misinformation im sorry, but it still applies to other horsemen that we know about.
Comanches didn't just fight from their horses, they lived on their horses. Once they had mastered horsemanship, Comanches didn't walk much unless they had no alternative.
I learned earlier this year that horses were already present in America before the Spanish and they even said that it was those horses that made it over to Asia across the land bridge. It was basically the complete opposite of what had been established. I love this sort of archeological research because every year, we learn more and more, with every dig, book found, etc., etc. It's pretty cool! Seeing all those old culture names was pretty amazing, since they were so foreign to me. It really makes you think about how humans developed over time and who survived and what got passed down to today, if anything at all.
not only horses... camels too... they both evolved in the Americas and when the landbridge brought the Siberians open, the animals spread to Asia and beyond...
but the Siberians in the Americas ate the horses in the continent, and considering that the escaping to Asia horses were the size of a dog... then yes!... the Spaniards brought back an all-new species...
@user-McGiver Yeah, they weren't anything like what we have now. They were pretty small...I think even smaller than miniature horses. Would have made for a tasty snack for someone or something!
@@Shifang Yeah!... try ''everyone and everything'' better, and explain that to the horse too... that by finding a use for it and ''evolving'' it we saved it... the thing is that those invading from Siberia ''Mongols'' [ same religion and customs ] ate the entire mega-fauna of the Americas... outa ''love and respect for life and Nature'' [crap]
Horses of th present variety were present in North America 18000 years ago and the ancestors of our Indigenous cousins slaughtered over 1000 Genera of species including the horse (the Pleistocene Extinction).
I grew up around Plains Indians and they say "the horse made us" but none of them realize it was actually the Spanish who made them by re-introducing horses to North America ... but this time they were smart enough to ride them rather than slaughter them.
The notion of the ecological in tune Indian is worse that a myth - it is a lie.
that's not the opposite of what had been established - the fact that horses originate in America, from where they migrated into Asia, is well known for quite some time. Other thing is that American wild horses later died out and were only reintroduced by Europeans in early modern times... now, there is some evidence that some American horses potentially survived into later pre-Columbian times, but the clear pattern of horse-riding spreading and completely altering lifestyle of plain tribes in early modern times shows that these potential survivors weren't domesticates and didn't have any real impact on pre-Colombian society...
I raced my Arabian bareback with other teenagers. Afterwards my horse and I would run full speed back to the barn for oats. A braided rope and the belief that Indians rode that way so it HAD to be. Possible. My first horse at age 4 was a Shetland Pony. Loved him dearly and he was so calm around children like me. Man has tamed many animals and we were made for a garden full of all sorts of animals. It still feels right.😊
Great story Karen lol
This debunks Arab nationalist who think Horses were first tamed in Arabia (they literally believe that)
Do they really? Well I guess everyone has their own historical myths.
The same with coffee, or CovFeFe as many now call it, to which they also lay claim, but it came from Ethiopia.
@@DanDavisHistory yes lol. Arabian folklore states the first horses were tamed by them.
I study Arab culture a lot and have a lot of Arab friends.
Trust me even non nationalist Arabs think they tamed the first horses
The only thing they domesticated were camels but even that’s debatable. Camel domestication likely happened in east africa.
@@ChromeMan04Arabia is actually extension of Africa itself.Not a separate entity.
I imagine the early horse-eaters used them somewhat as the Suomi use reindeer. Riding, if it happened at all, would be of minor importance, and I can't see it happening at all until well after mares were first milked. Possibly horses were first used as pack animals, or to pull a travois. The early Irish used to hitch horses to the plough by tying it to their tail.
The Mesopotamian horse racing looks remarkably like a donkey derby, and that is still the most popular way to ride a donkey bareback. A proper saddle, even a Roman style one with no stirrups, makes a great difference in speed for either horse or donkey.
No way could a horse pull a plough with its tail, it would just pull the hair out. It takes a large amount of force to pull a plough through the soil.
Fair Blessed Gwenhwyfar, the Irish like to tell the tall tails! The tales are there for amusement!
@@SigurdVolsunga On the contrary. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Act_against_Plowing_by_the_Tayle,_and_pulling_the_Wooll_off_living_Sheep I read the Estyn Evans essay that it cites many years ago.
@@SigurdVolsunga the Spanish in Mexico used the horses tail to rope cattle before they developed a saddle with a horn . Saddles with roping horns are a recent development , about 300 years old . As well the plow you are thinking of is a moldboard plow which is also very recent development , the earlier plows were just a sharp stick with a beam , which could easily be pulled by a horse tail . Some times they were pulled by the farmers wife
@@jenniferbrien3408 it must have been an ard (a point for breaking the ground) rather than a true plough. A horse simply wouldn't be able to actually plough by pulling it with it's tail. There is just way to much force required to pull an actual plough through the ground.
An online search on this mainly found Irish sources calling tales of them tieing inplements to horses tails slander, and descriptions of crude harrows tied to horses tails.
When we speak about the invention of gunpowder, one of the arguments against its convergent invention in Europe and China is that it appears in European historical record alongside basic firearms. While Mesopotamia might have left first concrete evidence of horses being ridden, wouldn't there then have been a period when horses were used for other purposes there, like gunpowder was used for medicine and later fireworks in China, before it was used for weaponry?
cogent
My like and comment, thank you very much for videos i love to watch. You passion is evident in your voice.
Trying to ride a hard-to-find horse sounds a lot like modern rodeo
"Numidian horsemen rode without saddles or bridles, controlling their mounts with a simple rope around their horse's neck and a small riding stick. They had no form of bodily protection except for a round leather shield or a leopard skin, and their main weapon were javelins in addition to a short sword." (Wikipedia)
So the technology needed to be effective mounted warriors would certainly have been available to neolithic horse herders. Whether the horses were capable of being used in the style of the numidians is another question and just because something was possible doesn't mean people actually did it, but it seems a lot more likely that early horsemen would have fought primarily with javelins than as shock troops with battleaxes.
It appears that the Numidian Horsemen were superb. The Roman Cavalry could neither chase them off or close with them to engage. They probably had some sort of gear on their mounts to carry javelins and water/wine bottles at the very least.
@@cliffordjensen8725 artwork from the period shows them carrying a bundle of spare javelins in their off hand. A waterskin could have been slung over their shoulder if they needed it.
To this day, in my native dialect of Croatia we still call livestock of all kind "blago" which in literal sense means treasure/wealth. As such, a man blessed with livestock/horses is blessed in wealth indeed. This most of all regards to bovines and horses.
That's wonderful! And absolutely right.
@@DanDavisHistory I find your videos extremely interesting and wish you all the best in your future works ! I am happy your videos are picking up, they certainly deserve the attention.
Bronze Age is criminaly underresearched and lacking its presence in attention of people who are interested in history. But I am happy that in recent few years both archeology and people like you are doing great work to bring up this very interesting age into its deserved spotlight.
Thank you, I really appreciate that.
The Anglo-Saxon word "fee" come from the word for cattle. As with most Indo-European pastoral peoples, cattle was the currency. In ancient Ireland, a man could only have a wife if he had the required number of cows, sheep, and horses; and he would pay the bride's family in a set number of cattle.
Wow! Blago means something good in Russian. Blagodarit' - "to thank", where darit' means "to give". So that literally means "to give cattle". I've just learned something new. Thanks 👍
P.s. I can't give you any cattle, though, as I don't own any. 😁😁😁
My opinion is if they were raising them, someone would try riding them.
Make sens, considering that this took place over a wide era, thousands of years, so sure, they was used to horse, hunted them for ages, observed and knowed them well. Maybe they became less with time for some reason, then people protected their food ressources against other people and predators. With the time, some foals was raised, and of course, became still tamer, and one day, why not, one hopped on them after lot other trials. ;) - Fall was hard, but would do it again !
Probably the first to try were teenage boys playing with horses that were being kept for food. You get some boys around any kind of animal big enough to ride, and they'll try it.
more simple, someone placed a child on the back of tamed horse, that started it, or at first they put a basket on the horse while walking to help carry things, and then a basket with a baby and then a kids.. it is simple enough. I have seen 3 year children who have no idea what a horse is get on the back of a big dog.
People raised cattle, sheep, goats, pigs and chickens. "If they were raising them, someone would try riding them" is either wrong or all the attempts were so spectacularly unsuccessful that no-one bothered to try a second time.
@@davidgould9431 People have been riding water buffalos in Indonesia for a long time. My cousin had a cow trained to take a saddled and ride it. People have used oxen for a long time too. I remember it was fun trying to ride the hog.
Wow, love the presentation of different hypotheses!
Many of the native peoples here in North America who captured and used the feral horses that escaped from the Spanish, trained and rode them without bits and bridles. They used a leather thong with a loop in the end that was placed in the horse's mouth for steering and control. Other leather straps were braided into the horse's mane for a handhold, and a simple pad and strap were used for a saddle. The person riding the horse invested a lot of time and effort into training it to work with the rider, just like people do today. Different methods, similar results. There's no reason why the ancient steppe people didn't do the same thing. The leathers would leave it no trace being organic, and it was more than likely only some people were of a mind to try the idea out... There's always one guy or gal who says "I wonder what would happen if..." So, I am of the mind that horse taming and riding was early, but the idea didn't exactly spread like wildfire until later
That was already accounted for by Anthony. They trained horses using leather and hemp bits; their findings suggest that they too would leave marks on horses' teeth.
Excellent analysis & formed - reassured my opinion of early horsemen. Thank you
Thank you for watching.
I never had the impression from reading Anthony that he was suggesting the Yamnaya were capable of mounting actual armed cavalry operations. But it isn't hard to imagine that armed warriors, skilled enough in horse control to manage herds, might have also used them for getting to a location for a quick raid and then escaping on them afterwards. People on foot would have difficulty catching up with raiders who could get away on horses even if for a short distance with relative primitive means of controlling the animals. In fact, this would have been such a valuable advantage that it is hard to imagine someone would not have developed the tactic at a relative early date. One might further conjecture that actual cavalry tactics might have developed later as a means of defending against such predation.
No Anthony specifically argues against armed cavalry invasions, he says that is a feature of the Iron Age but he does talk about mounted raiders.
@@DanDavisHistory It is interesting to speculate if improved horsemanship might have played a role in the Bronze Age collapse. More effective mounted forces would have played havoc on the long trade routes that had developed up to that time. And that could be why the Iron age saw the growing use of horses as a military asset.
@@DanDavisHistory I don't think Mr. Shannon was suggesting large scale cavalry operations; but rather small scale raids, perhaps along the lines of the Táin Bó Cúailnge from Irish myth? Cattle raids are a feature of all nomadic/pastoral peoples, with or without horse (or camel) riding. Ten guys riding bareback without horse bits, arrive to the camp of whomever they're raiding. Get off the horses, steal whatever they're stealing, and get back on the horses to escape. Raiding, for pastoral peoples, is what passed for warfare for thousands of years.
The Botai taught them and they merged, cementing the Proto Indo European language and their technology conquered the earth.
@@TigerWoodsLibido It would be a thousand years before anyone was conquering anyone from the back of a horse.
To start off with, I love horses. It is hard to remember when I first saw a horse. But I do remember the first time I was close up to a horse. I was maybe 4 years old and to me the horse was so huge. I had to go or shall I say sneak past his stall to go to the toilet each time I needed to go. This was on the farm our family owned in Norway. When I came to Australia at the age of 8 there were several horses in the paddock at the back of our house. These were owned by the commissioner of Police at the time here in Brisbane. I helped the boys from the farm to feed the horses and one of the horses was my favourite. His name was Smokey. I would hop onto his back by grabbing his mane and throwing my leg over his back and holding on for life and limb. He was agisted on a 10 acre, though a long block of land with the other horses and halfway along the block there were some tea trees growing. He would gallop towards the trees with me hanging on, as I said with for dear life. One of the trees had a horizontal branch growing out from it that Smokey was able to fit under whilst galloping at a rather fast speed, though he did slow down a little as he knew I could not fit with me on top of him. So, I always ended up on the ground with him eating grass a foot or so away from my head, probably thinking, 'are you stupid or something boy? We have done this so many times now so you should know what happens'. But I did not care. I would get up and pat and talk to him. Grab him around the neck and swing about off the ground while he still ate grass. But he surprised me one day. I had just filled his container full of chaff and I was standing on his left side as one does when mounting a horse. He was eating and I was stroking him, then suddenly he grabbed me by one of my 9 year old boy boobs and lifted me over the container he was eating from and put me down on his righthand side. He then continued to eat. He had not actually hurt me, nor broken the skin at all, though I did develop a bit of a bruise from his teeth. Even so, I kept stroking him till he was finished so I could put his container, a galvanised baby bath, away. Unfortunately, he ended up with tetanus a couple of years later and had to be destroyed. I have owned my own horses since then and I named one of the Smokey. oooops, that was a rather long story.🙂
Another excellent video! This vid made me think about James Burke’s “Connections” when he talked about how the “stirrup” changed horse mounted warfare drastically. As an innovation it was a turning point that made shock war on horseback even more effective.
Great topic! Always fascinated with how our ancestors lived.
I appreciate your use of photos of the covers of the books you referenced. It gives me a subtle motivation to consider buying the books you have used.
Thanks, glad you liked it.
Dear Dan, Any history of Equus is welcomed by me. The Anthropological dealings with Equus in Ancient History is fascinating to say the least. I always used to say that St. Paul (was struck off his horse: a white Andulisian - of course) when he met with his conversion, to today; with the diaspora of Equus throughout the world. Well done! As this was a wonderful documentary; reaching back that far. P
Very interesting video, thank you for it
I'm firmly on the early riding hypothesis: you can ride a horse without nearly anything at all, especially if as other people mentioned you grew up with it
Other thing is I grew up on the farm and I tried to ride any animal we ever had (out of curiosity) - and while adults wouldn't probably do it, I'm sure some of Neolithic kids would have a go: you're just curious and adventurous as a kid. How on Earth do you llive among horses for thousands of years and never try to ride one? Ridiculous.....
Love this!! Very well presented. Will try your other programmes, Thank you.
Just came upon your channel this morning and, im definitely impressed! Fantastic content
Your videos are brilliant. Keep reading and keep making them.
Ancient riders probably rode on the back side of the horse because horses spine wasn't adapted to heavy loads in the middle. Even modern horses have a lot of spine problems, even with modern saddles
Oddly, today I heard a radio report that (among other things) said that the genetics of the modern horse gives them a stronger spine than the horse types which are now extinct.
Terrific, informative video, thanks Dan. 👍🌱🌿
This channel needs more subs. Great stuff. 100 k subs this year
Thank you very much. Let's hope so.
How delightful to find a video by a fellow writer! I did not expect that!
That Mesopotamian 'horse' led by a nose ring (19:54) looked more like wolf to me, like some mythic godlike entity riding a giant wolf and leading it by a nose ring after the fashion of bulls being led by nose rings.
We have an old saying in Germany ""Get a Foal and you get the Mare and then you get the Stallion for free"" The Importens is the Foal and the next foal , you let it grow with a young Boy and it will let him sit on top of it , in Mongolia the Jockey are mostly young boys
Is it at all possible that horse riding started in the Indus valley . Researchers have indicated that for the spread of the Indo European languages , horses were the means of covering vast amounts of territory. Therefore mobility could only be achieved by the utilization of horses. I am looking forward to the responses.
@@phillipmaasdorp9491 The hierarchy is bones leather as Wappen meat and milke as food than pulling carring for transport and ad the last came horse riding .The ratio soldier/horse never got ander 4/1 like in ww 2 so I know
Thank u for ur videos man. Ur work is endlessly fascinating.
Bless this man and all his links in the description. I've been looking for great maps of pre-historic migrations.
The best riding lessons l ever had were learning to sit and stay on the horse without stirrups or reins. The instructor guided the horse on a lunge line while I learned balance, keeping my heels down, my arms out to the sides for balance and my eyes fixed between the horses ears. Once you learn how to keep your balance staying on the horse at speed was easy. But it was a lot of work to learn.
I have to put my two bits in. As a kid on the prairies, maybe nine to ten years old, I rode and loved a horse that I rode everywhere with nothing but touch, love, and a halter. My girl would lower her head so I could put my foot in the loop of the halter rope, then raise her head and let me slide down her neck to her back. Don't discount those kind of bonds in prehistory. Notice that modern humans make pets of some of the animals that they raise for slaughter...that is not a thing of civilization but profoundly old.
This is fascinating. Came across it while looking for information on medieval jousting. I didn't realize that the practice of riding horses can be traced back to about 2 or 3 thousand years ago. That's practically a recent development.
Shared at Westeros.org along with video Army of the Dead
Faster travel means more communication and faster advancement.
i recon they must have been riding earlier than drew states , homer in the 8th bc talks about the centaurs from an ancient past prospective. i dont think the neo/bronze age steppe people were doing cavalry charges but using horse for mobility ,out flankes etc . any military advancement normally ends in victory. the advance of the beaker into europe and end of neolithic culture suggests an advantage more than a bronze axe would give , poss advanced archery or the horse or both . although plague in neo societies prior to the beaker couldve also lead to the cultural and genetic replacement that happened.
The selective spread of Y haplogroups, and the inclusion of mitochondrial genoms suggests warfare, instead of a plague, unless it is a sex selective plague...
Love your presentations. Thank you for your dedication and fine production.
Growing up in Romania’s country side we had kids riding on the backs of horses without any kind of saddle or equipment. They would also ride them very very fast
Personally I think that the early steppe peoples would have used horses to move to and from raids rather than fight from horse back, I remember reading that naitive american tribes when they first got the horse did a similar thing before they got the hang of fighting from horse back
Yeah their mobility would still convey and advantage even if the warriors dismounted before battle.
Ancient Mongolians used horses to fight with. They used bows and arows to fight while riding them.They were famous for doing so. As a matter of fact,one of the most famous Horse people were the Scythians.
@@xScooterAZx But that's thousands of years later, from the time horses were domesticated, which I think is the author's point.
@@oduffy1939 His comment was this,in part::
"Personally I think that the early steppe peoples would have used horses to move to and from raids rather than fight from horse back."
The part about the Native Americans is the part that was much later than what I was saying. I was also simply adding to his comment,not attempting to refute it.
I watch a lot of historical content, and I'd say you're easily one of the best. You have a wonderful voice and your diction is flawless. You make it a pleasure to learn about these ancient societies. My thanks.
all bare back short lived and a great deal of fun thats how riding skills where developed
You can ride a horse with a halter and reins made a Baler twine, I've done it.
So there wouldn't necessarily be any hard pieces to the first horse tack that would become archeological remains of the first bridles is quite possible. The bit itself could likely came about later.
My first horse as a child and young adult was to ride my mare with just a halter and lead rope around our large pasture. I'd be grooming her then too lazy to go back and get her bridle so I'd take the lead rope and tie it on the other side to make a long loop then throw it over her head for a pair of reins and exercise her for a short while. For riding, I used a hackamore with her (which has no bit). I now use a bosal on my current horse. A bosal is made from rawhide. All those options would show no sign of riding on horses' teeth. Personally, I prefer bitless options.
I think I take something of a middling position in terms of the Yamnaya riding horses into Europe: using horses in warfare =/= fighting your opponents from horseback. I agree with Drews that some random steppe herder on horseback wouldn't be a particularly big combat multiplier for them in a face-to-face fight. But I wouldn't discount the value of mobility when it comes to the type of warfare that would have been happening in the EBA. The Yamnaya probably used horses much as early modern dragoons, ride up to the fight before dismounting to do the fighting.
And keep in mind that there would have been little in the way of 'pitched battles' during the centuries long, decentralized movement into Europe. Most 'warfare' would have consisted of endemic skirmishing and cattle rustling. Where that sort of 'dragoon' fighting style would have been a massive combat multiplier, without a single herder having to ever needing swing an axe from horseback.
I wonder how it would affect overall the Kurgan hypothesis, if the Kurgans were in fact not those aggressive horse-riders, but rather just fancied horse meat and were really good husbandmen
Yeah Anthony points out mechanisms that could have resulted in steppe dominance other than waves of pure violence. Some people would like to find multiple massacre sites before they believe it was conquest by systemic violence.
@@DanDavisHistory Well, Horseriders were first to get iron, and whole Celtic was inspired by them. Also, By some sources, Scythians were botch very warior-like and somewhat pacefule, by achemenid standards.
My guess is that horse riding developed after seeing people ride oxen. We see Rock Art in the Sahara of people riding oxen and some South-African Tribes like the Khoi-Khoi and Xhosa also rode oxen into battle. So I think Neolithic Europeans also used oxen for riding on occasion.
Horse Milk residue was found on human teeth from the 3rd Millennium BC. somewhere in the Black Sea Steppe. So again not a massive jump from milking cows to milking horses. Same with pulling carts or a travois. Cattle basically served as blueprint for what can possibly be achieved by using the horse.
Have you got a source for the battle oxen in South Africa? Everything I have seen on warfare in the region records them both as fighting on foot, and riding oxen into battle would have been remarkable, so likely to be recorded and commented on.
Angkor Wat has some carvings of what appears to be people riding Rhino's.
I believe the riding oxen into battle is apocryphal. People have been riding oxen here in Africa for millennia, but what use would an ox be in battle? Ox-back archer? I think Europeans saw people riding oxen like horses and then assumed they used them in other ways horses are used, as in battle.
@@philipgeyer926Not apocryphal at all. They used oxen in this manor to charge horses of the Vryburgers and with some success were able to injure some horses. Basically used as a shock tactic but not extensively afterwards in battle. Gaan kyk maar na een van die frescoes in die Voortrekker monument.
@@SigurdVolsunga Voortrekker Monument. I do not have a better source than the Frescoe but I read it in a book many years ago about this so have to go look where I read it.
Just came across your channel today. Excellent content! Looking forward to checking out some of your fiction as well.
Question. Can't the increased mobility be explained by the horse being used for transporting goods, not by humans riding them? Like a mule or donkey, after all the horses back then were at the size of a donkey.
As a hiker I knew it's quite easy to move far distances on foot, just given enough time. The problem is moving everything you need with you. Both trade and migration requires the movement of a lot of items and goods, and to me that seems more important than moving humans. Humans can move themselves; tents, clothes, weapons, tools and food cannot.
This makes me kinda inclined to believe the late riding theory.
I enjoyed this video very much, as I have others of yours I stumbled across recently. I' have read Anthony's book and find it very compelling, especially because he is willing to consider different hyphotheses along with sifting through a lot of evidence. You do that too, and I value that highly; also that you give your references so generously. Granted, that only encourages my dreadful book buying habit, but there are worse habits.
I like your view that the early horse riding was simply hanging onto the mane. That's a solution to how people were able to herd horses, which are so much faster than cattle and sheep, and also better at self-defense. And, it would make it likely that people would not slaughter the biggest, strongest and most biddable horses, but rather keep them, and allow them to breed..
One of the most important “steps” for human progress was the “taming” of the horse ! The horse then became the biggest helper of men, for everything !
Before horse-riding, I would guess a thousand years at least of small horses for haulage, perhaps first without and later with, wheels.
Loved this info man. Nice job. Good clear explaining.
All the experts have one thing in common. Opinions, opinions that cannot be proven right or wrong. If incontrovertible evidence comes forward, it will still be questioned by experts. You sir are an amazing story teller. I am happy you have found your purpose. Insurance sux. I was agent for 20 years and hated it.
Apparently, people who are much more experienced equestrians than I have confirmed that bareback horse ridding is not only possible, but common. In that case, it might be that the use of horses as battlefield cavalry was a later development than most people thought, but none the less, I would imagine the ability to ride horses would enable a roving tribe of conquerors a much greater mobility advantage over their enemies, even if the horse was simply a means of transportation between battles and sieges.
Great video. Do you have another channel called "Attractive ladies riding horses"? - or is that just a hobby?
There is also the issue of viewing horse riding in terms of warfare as only fighting from horseback, we know of a plenthora of troops throughout history who did not fight on horseback but travelled on a horse but fought on foot. The mere notion of being able to transport and deploy your soldiers to one place or the other and then have them fight on foot was a massive advantage by itself, and possibly predated fighting directly from horseback by centuries, if not millenias.
Thanks for doing this video. Ironically, I recently read The Horse, The Wheel, and Language because I was looking into the The Indo European Question when I was confronted by the excessive detail in this book, realizing right away I had to read, reread and read again various chapters in this book. Additionally,I just discovered the book from Robert Drew's about Indo European Militarism and saw his book Early Riders in my additional research into this topic. So, I really appreciate your videos helping to guide me on what books I should read. I look forward to watching everything you've posted so far to compare your reading suggestions and the information you've discussed in your videos to what I've covered on my own, thus far. I'm happy I've been on the right track!
You have a voice of silk and velvet. Bless you and your work....🙌
Your video's are always food for thought!
Thanks!
I enjoyed your video. To me it seems likely that riding for transport came earlier (helps explain the vast geographical expansion of the Indo Europeans) but the riding for warfare came later with chariot riding coming first. What interests me is the analogous role of donkey domestication which occurred in Africa and I believe explains the spread of the Northern Afroasiatic languages in North Africa and the Fertile Crescent. Donkey domestication facilitated long distance trade and allowed for the development of pastoralism in semi arid areas. Equids have played an amazing role in human history.
Riding and fighting from horse back would be different things.
Well,yes they are. However you need to learn balance for both though. First you need to learn to ride,then to use weapons,then to learn to use them together. Ancient Mongols did both,..on the run.
@@xScooterAZx While being 5.
What a brilliant video Sir. Do not much like horses, but now I see the picture of their impact on humans. Thank you.
Excellent video by the way. I grew up around geologists and archeologists. Played in the trenches of archeological site near Fort Ticonderoga at tender age. Rodgers rangers winter fort site. Fossil hunted in Poricy Creek and found 32, 60 million yr old shark teeth and a sawfish tooth. Fascinating discipline. Maybe that's where my insatiable interest in history started.
Look for signs of riding in the bones of the riders and any artifacts related to riding. There is a video of the oldest trousers discovered in Kazakhstan and go from there
Just found a vid about those trousers a few weeks ago! İndeed. Good point. 👍Need to find the published work now. Hopefully.😊
I wondered about that. People who grew up riding and rode for long hours tend to have bowed legs and other anatomical indicators.
Funy tho sad, that non-academic people are forced to go around and rediscover what was well documented before, bocouse of limited availibility of sources in public domain.
Hmm...I tend more to favor the earlier version for a couple of reasons.
1) It's easier to train a horse to ride than pull any form of a wagon.
2) The damage done by a horse acting up while pulling a wagon is going to be far greater than just falling off one.
3) The harness needed for a horse to pull a wagon is a fairly complex piece of craftsmanship. Far more complex than the bridle used to ride one.
4) Taking the step from riding a horse and using a horse to fight from is a major evolutionary step that takes time, and honestly doesn't need to have been taken for centuries, even millennium. Also the last cavalry during WWII used their horses just to travel from point A to point B. Why wouldn't the first have done the same?
I would say that it sounds logical to me that horses were first ridden with no intent on doing more than travel quicker. Then came the travois, only later someone came up with the idea to put wheels on a travois.
And, as far as no evidence of bits, I've known trained horses that could not take one without getting infection. They're really not that necessary, American Indians rarely used a bridle with any kind of a bit.
I also feel that the final say should be an evolutionary genetic evaluation, that can determine how long it took for the domestication. So far, either could be right, or both wrong. They are both just hypotheses.
Very good observations. I have to agree with you and maybe add the migration of the Tocharians across the entire Khazak steppe as possible further evidence. Such a journey would require enormous mobility and the ability to scout ahead of the group to asses dangers and to find routes of travel. It's interesting to note that the Botia culture began domestication around the time of the Tocharian migration to the Altai.
That I can agree with. Though not as old, some of the Tarim mummies (Tocharian) wore britches. Which is a clear evidence of only being needed if riding horses for longer periods of time. (And, those britches weren't leggings, rather very complex and detailed, designed especially for riding a horse.) That could show evidence of riding being already well advanced as far back as 3800 years ago.
4)Mounted combat is likely older than X ce. BC. by asocietion witch Kimmerian culture. And, if Chineese sources are to be belive (doutably) it could be older than XX ce. BC.
Agree, (+/-) 1,000/2,000 B.C. is far too late. There isn't enough time for the evolutionary trial and error to have taken place. Things just don't pop up out of nowhere. It takes time, lots of time. (Our PoV is too skewed by the modern day ability to produce a massive amount of development within a short time.)
@@michaelwittkopp3379 Well, there are some deniable sugestions for mounted archery in the time of stone henge creation.
"Chariots first" idea assumes that the wheel preceded horse riding. I'm not sure about that. Having a herd of pack animals, who can pull primitive sleds seems like a major improvement to mobility. Suddenly you don't need to carry all your belongings on your own back.
1. Taming and herding first.
2. Domestication.
3. Utilization as pack and draft animals.
4. The wheel, once it's absolutely obvious, because you do have a bunch of draft animals already.
Where horse-riding comes into this picture? I don't know, really.
That’s counterintuitive. Without domesticated livestock, there was more selective pressure for humans to be innovative. Why do think the cultures belonging to [the relatively petite] Neolithic West Eurasians were so much more sophisticated (e.g. stratified, urban, and agricultural) than those belonging to the [physically larger, more robust, and better adapted] Western Hunter-Gatherers that preceded them? For the same fundamental reasons that caused Cro-Magnon man to be intellectually and technologically superior to Homo neanderthalensis.
@@thebrocialist8300 west eurasians needed to band together to support their irrigation systems, eurasian herders did not need any of that, so they had much lower population density and hence less inovation
@@thebrocialist8300 Both early agrarians and early pastoralists went through a period of misery during their transition to a new lifestyle. The agrarians had very poor diet. Mostly grains, very little meat (no domesticated animals), most of vegetables were not domesticated, etc. They suffered accordingly.
Similarly, pastoralists went through similar hardship when they started to rely on milk in large quantities. Lactose intolerance is still the norm among humans, so it definitely was for them too. Those who couldn't digest milk well, simply suffered. Apparently, it can be seen in their remains.
Which lifestyle has more favorable selection toward innovation? It's probably settled lifestyle, simply because it allows for amassing wealth. Excess food production creates niches, which allow for new inventions that fit those new environments, but I'm not sure that the selection pressures are easy to distinguish.
Plenty of important innovations came from the steppes. Definitely domestication of many animals, quite possibly the wheel, lots of cultural traditions (Zoroastrianism, Vedic religions), composite bow, probably more.
Settled lifestyle allows for specialization, nomadic lifestyle encourages trade and exchange of ideas. Which one was more selective toward innovation? I simply can't tell. Eventually the issue totally disappeared, as pastoralism became a part of settled agriculture. Ever since it happened, it's a moot point.
For years I rode without a bit, only a bosal (a firm nose loop that when you pull on, pulls the head down and cuts off air if you keep pulling), I rarely pulled on the bosal as my horse responded to 'neck' reining (he was a stallion, old stock Appaloosa) and body posotion. When I first started riding it was bareback with a halter, then I used a snaffle, then switched to the bosal as it gave good control...as for saddles, most of my friends and I rode bareback, or with a bareback saddle (a pad with stirrups), or Western. The thing is, I broke/trained more then ten horses to neck rein with a soft snaffle bit or no bit and never had control issues...I don't think 'bits' were part of horse tack until quite a bit late to the game and more for those who are afraid of horses or who didn't grow up on them.
As for Przewalski's horse, I'm really confused, the horse was bred 'back' to the ancient traits, I had books and articles on the breeding program, so of course there is modern DNA. How can that knowledge just have vanished? My friend still has a book talking about the breeding programs to create Przewalska's Horse...and now that work is forgotten? What's next, the confusion over how modern Chickens appeared? How laying hens magically lay more eggs then Wild Jungle fowl? How about wool production in sheep -- hint, wool production does NOT occur in wild sheep like in tame wool sheep (they shed, never produce the amount that sheep bred for wool production does, and the strands are never as long).
We are losing too much information... I get that 'facts are bad' is the modern belief, but really, I recently heard a woman complaining because her doctor argued with her that there is no cure for stomach ulcers and no one knows what causes them -- here in CANADA! In a modern Western city hospital! ...she had to show him on her phone, explain about the bacteria, AND demand an antibiotic, which she had to name... (I get he is most likely a ghoul (someone who makes a living of the suffering and death of others -- more suffering, more drugs) and the drugs he wanted her to take she'd have to take for life -- according to him -- and he'd make money every time she refilled her prescription... I find this loss of basic knowledge scary...
Excellent work! Highly informative and concisely presented.
For the record, I'd be fascinated to watch athat "History of the Chariot" video you mentioned in passing. :)
Thank you. Yes we will have to do that for sure.