Talk:Horseshoe

message: Hi Everyone,
I don't want to tread on anyone's toes here...  I recognize that the art of farriery is a well established one, with many traditions that hold merit despite lack of scientific evidence.  My comments here are those of somebody who is involved purely with the scientific research in this area, and with very little practical farriery experience.
I think this article could be dramatically improved, and parts of it are a little mis-leading.  I can re-write those parts of the article that I see as most deficient, providing references to referreed journal articles to support my comments.
Is there anyone actively working on this article who might be upset if I go ahead and do that?  I'm asking because my changes will be quite substantial...
- Jonathan Merritt 1 September 2003.
:I'm planning to improve the historical aspects as I get time. I already put a photo of a hipposandal up on wiki commons. 
:What aspects of the article are misleading?
:--Nantonos 11:40, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite

message: I think it would be good to have a bit about various types of shoe - say racing places, hunter, remedial shoes such as the egg bar. Also something about how the shoe is put on, the traditional method, hot and cold shoeing. Maybe something about 'natural balance' shoes. Comments?Ashfan83 22:37, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Types of horse shoe and shoeing methods

message: Is the section on walking horses too positive when talking of horse shoes?  Some abuse has occurred in this are and continues to occur.  Perhaps some mention of the abuse potential is in order?  The article says "Special shoeing can help enhance their natural movement."Ggb667 11:05, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what I was thinking too, although I don't know quite enough about the subject to edit it myself. 97.104.210.67 (talk) 21:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gait 

message: It's hyronical that retained ideas no deserve any proof or quote... new ideas need lots of them. I added a brief, very polite mention to barefoot horse into a clearly not neutral article at all; respecting a wide, but probably wrong, point of view. Anybody can find into the web lots of evidence (both testimonial and scientific so far) against the practice of shoeing; it's really difficult to find some evidence in the web - some good, scientific evidence - in favour of shoeing practice. Please read "The Unfettered Hoof" by dr Tomas Teskey: http://www.equinextion.com/id48.html and its large bibliography. --Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 15:26, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV issue... 

message: I'd love a little more firm history about when horseshoes came in. Phrases like 'in the earliest days' I find a bit frustrating. I came to the page hoping to find out if the Romans used horseshoes.
82.152.254.146 09:41, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Any additional research and material that can improve this article is welcome.  I am afraid I don't have the time to do it at present.Montanabw(talk) 19:08, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just wanted to point out that the Koran reference is "Sura 100, verse 1-2" as can be seen here: http://www.universalunity.net/quran4/100.qmt.html .  The "citation needed" makes it look like the existence of this verse is in dispute (it is not.) Qed (talk) 03:03, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  More history? 

message: Have rated as class B not Good only because I don't have time to peer review.. looks good overall.
Have called WP:VM bacause there doesn't seem to be another suitable WP- see my notes on Farrier. If anyone really disagrees, either let me know, or take it off (but please say why!).
Dlh-stablelights 20:41, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject Veterinary Medicine

message: below is text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition (1911) on horseshoes, wiki has a project to be sure these articles are fully integrated (where appropriate) into wikipedia.  This one is interesting, has some useful material, but some stuff that is badly outdated.  What I have integrated, I have placed in italics If anyone wants to integrate more of this into the horseshoe article, carefully, here ya go!
:"HORSE - Shoes. The horny casing of the foot of the horse and other Solidungulates, while quite sufficient to protect the extremity of the limb under natural conditions, is found to wear away and break, especially in moist climates, when the animal is subjected to hard work of any kind. This, however, can be obviated by the simple device of attaching to the hoof a rim of iron, adjusted to the shape of the hoof. The animal itself has been in a very marked manner modified by shoeing, for without this we could have had neither the fleet racers nor the heavy and powerful cart-horses of the present day. Though the ancients were sufficiently impressed by the damage done to horses' hoofs to devise certain forms of covering for them (in the shape of socks or sandals), the practice of nailing iron plates or rim-shoes to the hoof does not appear to have been introduced earlier than the 2nd century B.C., and was not commonly known till the close of the 5th century A.D., or in regular use till the middle ages. The evidence for the earlier date depends on the doubtful interpretations of designs on coins, &c. As time went on, however, the profession of the farrier and the art of the shoesmith gradually grew in importance. It was only in the 19th century that horse-shoeing was introduced in Japan, where the former practice was to attach to the horse's feet slippers of straw, which were renewed when necessary, a custom which may indicate the usage of early peoples. In modern times much attention has been devoted to horse-shoeing by veterinary science, with the result of showing that methods formerly adopted caused cruel injury to horses and serious loss to their owners. The evils resulted from (1) paring the sole and frog; (2) applying shoes too heavy and of faulty shape; (3) employing too many and too large nails; (4) applying shoes too small and removing the wall of the hoof to make the feet fit the shoes, and (5) rasping the front of the hoof. In rural districts, where the art of the farrier is combined with general blacksmith work, too little attention is apt to be given to considerations which have an important bearing on the comfort, usefulness and life of the horse. According to modern principles (I) shoes should be as light as compatible with the wear demanded of them; (2) the ground face of the shoe should be concave, and the face applied to the foot plain; (3) heavy draught horses alone should have toe and heel calks on their shoes to increase foothold; (4) the excess growth of the wall or outer portion of horny matter should only be removed in re-shoeing, care being taken to keep both sides of the hoof of equal height; (5) the shoe should fit accurately to the circumference of the hoof, and project slightly beyond the heel; (6) the shoes should be fixed with as few nails as possible, six or seven in fore-shoes and eight in hind-shoes, and (7) the nails should take a short thick hold of the wall, so that old nail-holes may be removed with the natural growth and paring of the horny matter. Horse-shoes and nails are now made with great economy by machinery, and special forms of shoe or plate are made for race-horses and trotters, or to suit abnormalities of the hoof."
Have fun!  Montanabw(talk) 06:51, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anyone want a job? 

message: The practice of nailing metal* to the ground-bearing surface of horse’s hooves is difficult to date but there is evidence of it as early as 400 years before Christ. 
 Initially bronze then iron was used to make horseshoes later steel, Previous to the Bronze & Iron Age leather animal hide was laced to the hooves.
In the museum of Philadelphia, ther are 4 bronze horseshoes found in Corneto in ancient Etruria (modern Italy), in an Etruscan tomb dating from the 4th century BC, with them was found part of the jaw and teeth of a 12 year old horse. The shoes are semi circular in shape and cover a little more than half the foot. Each shoe has 3 holes some blocked with oxidized iron which suggests a nail or rivit was used to attach them.  {American Journal of Archeology, second series. Volume VI (1902) No 4.}http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/journals/AJA/6/4/Etruscan_Horseshoes*.html
To my knowledge these are the oldest surviving horseshoes, due to the fact that they are bronze. It is most likely that Iron was more commonly in use by this time but the capacity of iron to oxidise or rust means none have survived.
With regards to Iron shoes, In the year 1653 a piece of iron resembling a horse-shoe, and having nine nail-holes, was found in the grave of Childeric I., King of the Franks, who died A.D. 481. 
Contemporary historians relate that the Roman Emperor Nero (37-68 AD) caused his mules to be shod with silver, while golden shoes adorned the feet of the mules belonging to the notorious Empress Poppaea Sabina. 
There is art work that dates the use of horseshoes even earlier than 400 BC.
The shape of the Etruscan bronze shoes is very interesting they are broad around the toe with a tongue protecting the sole back to the point of the frog, each shoe only covers the foot from quarter to quarter leaving the heels to function naturally.Craig rd (talk) 16:46, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Regard history of horseshoes

message: The whole section on nutritional changes seems out of place here, and it is rife with misinformation (it seems to equate carotene with keratin, it seems to present laminitis as a reason for shoeing, and it plays fast and loose with the causes of laminitis). My inclination is to remove it altogether. Any objections?--Curtis Clark (talk) 00:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it.  Maybe  some talk about basic hoof health is appropriate here, or at least in the horse hoof article, but indeed, "carotene?"  =:-O   I think the barefooter crowd sort of had at this article way back (if you think the bitless bridle thing is heated, I am SOOO glad the barefoot horse fight was something that occurred prior to my active participation on wikipedia?  Did you ever hear the "horseshoe nails are poison?" argument?  Um, just like ear piercing in humans,  I guess...yep, that will kill you!  LOL!).  Anyway, no skin off my nose.  Montanabw(talk) 07:34, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Again montanabw, please be careful about attacking the "barefooter crowd."  Your comments are likely to offend. --AeronM (talk) 00:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nutritional changes 

message: I have put back the fact tags which were deleted concerning the first two sentences in the History section.  The first two sentences are leaning toward original research and should be adjusted.... either the sentences change to more accurately reflect the source info, or else new sources are needed to support the contribution.  --AeronM (talk) 00:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fact tags on History section

message: No time for me to add this in, but from another chat, some sourced material to plop into the article later.  Montanabw(talk) 00:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historic source stuff to work in 

message: Hmm, so the explaination of the difference between a farrier and a blacksmith is more appropriate to the farrier article.
You may be right, but considering how hollywood has completely confused the two professions, I think it would be nice to have a little clarification in this article also.
I won't argue, your call.  But, I added that 'cause I thought it was informative in context.
PS.  FWIW I am a blacksmith, I speak publically on the practice and history of blacksmithing, and have never, and never intend to try, to shoe an animal.24.10.111.154 (talk) 01:30, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I missed this whole series of edits, but I would hold the position that while a farrier needs to be able to do a certain amount of blacksmithing (i.e. iron working) in order to shoe horses, the art of shoeing horses encompasses  far, far more than blacksmithing.  (I am thinking of how barbers in the Middle Ages were called upon to be surgeons simply because they happened to own sharp tools. Sort of a similar thing with blacksmiths and farriers!  LOL!!!) One way or the other, I am cool with a few wikilinks to the appropriate articles so that those who care can learn more about each profession and understand the differences, whether here or elsewhere.  If you guys want me to wordsmith some sort of compromise into this article, let me know.  Otherwise, this was just my two bits.  Montanabw(talk) 03:43, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the distinction between farrier and blacksmith is an important one. (While some farriers develop impressive blacksmithing skills, many do not, and as the user at 24.10.111.154 states, most blacksmiths today are not farriers.)  The statement was phrased clearly, concisely, and in a non-biased way.   However, in the context of the sentence on the Archbishop of Canterbury, it seemed out of place.  That's why I gave it the axe.  The distinction could certainly be made in this article in, say, the Process of Shoeing section.  This would help to make the use of 'blacksmith' in the later section clearer.  Getwood (talk) 06:06, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Works for me.  Seems the spat has died down.  Do as you see fit.  Montanabw(talk) 09:17, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Getwood 

message: I know the term may be somewhat archaic, but it's quite a common traditional shoeing technique in Indonesia, where the tropical forests are slippery, muddy a lot of fallen damp logs, and give the horse poor traction. Often we use shoes with prominent caulkins.
rough·shod / ˈrəfˌshäd/ • adj. archaic (of a horse) having caulked shoes with nailheads projecting to prevent slipping. May also refer to a horse shod with horseshoes fitted with caulkins- studded projections intended for extra traction
which of course would be very unpleasant to be trampled by!
I'm currently writing a definition of "caulkin" and "roughshod". Please feel free to contribute.Starstylers (talk) 08:16, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Shoes with caulks -- whether manufactured with caulks, with added borium, toe graps for race horses (controversial), or screw-in caulks used by the hunter/jumper crowd -- are around everywhere.  There is a place for some history of terminology, but it is also important to avoid confusing readers by mixing archaic with current useage.  I'll look things over and see if some tweaking is needed.  This article probably would benefit from some expansion into the different types of shoes (flat plates, sliding plates, rim shoes, bar shoes, stacks, etc...) but we have to await someone with the time AND knowledge to do it...(or energy to do the proper research). Montanabw(talk) 04:12, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roughshod? 

message: Trippz, before I go and spend time on this article, I'd like clarification as to what specifically your concern is with the material on how late the nailed horseshoe developed.  The simple need for citations in the paragraph in question is understood, (much of the article needs that sort of improvement, no argument there) but what I cannot determine is if you are just making a mere citation request or if the concept itself is being challenged, as later paragraphs explain when the first evidence was found.  Are you trying to argue that nailed on horseshoes were known in Ancient Greece or something like that? Clarify... Montanabw(talk) 21:28, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not making an argument of that type at all, in fact I personally would tend to agree with most of the items in the data that was removed.  But .. as it stands the statements do not have any citations and appear to be grossly OR.  Not that the assertions are necessarily incorrect, just not supported in a verifiable context.  Unfortunately, that particular paragraph is riddled with what appears to be OR, on several different distinct topics - made even more obvious by the rapid-fire of them.  Current cite 7, does seem to support your assertion about nailed horseshoe history, but I would request that it be move up to the first assertion of this point - if applicable.  So, I'll retract that one.  As for the following paragraph, it smacks of heavy OR, most notably (but certainly not limited to) "war-horses ... which strike fire, by dashing their hoofs against the stones ... which, if taken literally, is an effect that could be obtained only by shod horses" ... says who? Could it not be metaphorical?  In what context does the Koran present that statement, and where does it come from?  Also, stating that Xenophon or Renatus didn't include it, but they mention everything else, so therefore it did not exist, is an absurd inclusion without a reliable source to back it up - even then it sounds dubious, but a source is a source, even if its a WP accepted source.  You or I might think this is likely, probably accurate, but you or I are not sources.  Needs to be supported, I tried to pinpoint the comments that are problematic, but unfortunately it was basically the entire paragraph, which is why I removed it initially.  These comments need to be sourced, or they need to be gone per WP:OR.  So no, I'm not challenging this on a conceptual level, or even historic level, I'm challenging it on a WP:OR level.  If the paragraph was culled from some particular work, it could explain why it sounds like one stream of assertions after another.  But if it is hodge-podged from various OR theories it doesn't belong in the article.  --Trippz 22:05, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The whole history section is somewhat disorganized and probably could use a rewrite.  I can probably find some history of farriery material other than assorted "horseshoer Joe's history" on the web, but may take a bit.  I would concur that most of what in there now came from a lot of different "drive by" edits, always a challenge to go back and find sources for stuff others put in.  I wouldn't so much say that it's OR as much as it's just not properly sourced.  I suppose it makes little sense to try and prove a negative, though it is accurate to say that Xenophon doesn't mention horseshoes.  Hmmm.  I think the point of that paragraph was to sort of discuss the great ancient cultures and note that they didn't use horseshoes.  I think the ref to the Qu'ran was originally down in the stuff from the AD 500s and 600s.  Ah heck.  I'll have to see if there is a good source on the early stuff that can be used.  Have a bit of patience, may be a bit..  Montanabw(talk) 03:15, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No worries, I appreciate your efforts.  Otherwise it reads well, and as I said, I personally don't disagree with the spirit of what's in that paragraph, just seems to be drawing some unsupported conclusions.  They are intriguing ideas, even got a bit of flare, but alas need some more substance.  Always patient for those who feel strongly enough to dig.  Good luck!  --Trippz 09:52, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  History issues 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Horseshoe. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.horseshoes.com/advice/invtshoe/winvhrs.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:04, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Not being familiar with horses, I'm guessing a thrown shoe is when the shoe comes off the horse at an inopportune moment? Not sure if that this term warrants its own article, but could be a possiblity
Ll1324 (talk) 15:40, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thrown shoe