Talk:Horses in the Middle Ages/Archive 1

message: Brilliant page; thanks Montanabw!  I tentatively named it 'Horses in the Middle Ages' in my sandbox, as it fitted the convention used at Horses in warfare, and seemed a bit broader than 'Medieval horses' (just as Horses in warfare is broader than 'warhorses').  Same format could be used if other articles were developed (eg Horses in Ancient Greece, Horses in World War I, Horses in the Roman Empire....).  However, most people would probably search for Medieval horses.  I don't feel strongly: whatever you think.
As for scope, the information is specific to Western Europe; I don't know if that should be noted in text or title.  (It could be extend to encompass other geographical areas, but I really have little knowledge there).  
Assuming medieval horses covers more than warhorses, I'll bring across the other stuff from my sandbox, which still needs work, but that can be done here, now there is somewhere to put it. Gwinva 07:59, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a bad idea, whenever you want, you can use the "Move" command up in the tabs, it will move the article to a new name and create a redirect link automatically.   You probably do want to put something about the European focus in the intro, yeah, eventually someone will whine about that.   When I have time, I'll look at some of the sandbox stuff, but I figure you are the lead editor on this one, most of the work is yours!  Again, really great job! Montanabw 05:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Having said all that, I note that across at Middle Ages, most articles take the form 'Medieval hunting' or 'Medieval gardening', which would fit with 'Medieval horses'. I also considered 'Horses in medieval Europe' or the very long 'Horses in Western Europe during the middle ages', and then couldn't make up my mind at all!!  I shall leave you to make the casting vote, and if you have no preference, the page can stay where it is.  Once we know its final name, I will start linking it from other articles.Gwinva 17:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Name and scope

message: That photo in commons of the cart horses probably is a horse close to the type of the medieval cart horse--big bodies, short legs.  That said, it's a guess for me.  I'd be really careful using photos unless they are from historical reenactments or scientific studies. 
Check out the article I linked to in the horse breeding section, it's a newer piece by Deb Bennett and pretty good.
Wikimedia has many horse images, but they are buried!  There is both Category:Horses and Category:Equus caballus (plus all the stuff in wikipedia that's NOT in commons but you can only find it via other articles...) and many images are only in one, not the other.  And that's the tip of the iceberg.  For awhile I was finding things by typing the word for "horse" in other languages (Pferd, Chaval, etc...) For our stuff, also try:
Category:Paintings of horses and Category:Knights  I grabbed an image or two from there and sort of threw them in randomly...do as you wish with them.
You may find some of the material in the Arabian horse article useful as to the clashes between Islam and Medieval Europe.  I also think we can wikilink to more Middle Ages articles...I think there are ones broken out here for early, high, and late periods, you'll have to check -- (I'm on a very slow dialup at home, so hard for me to do a lot of surfing when it takes three minutes to load a page!).  The Andalusian horse page has some useful material, but most of it isn't sourced or footnoted very well and some of the resource links are a bit on the commercial side...   Montanabw 05:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm on broadband, which does make browsing easy, but it does seem to lose the connection sometimes.  I've learnt the hard way to save small edits, as I've lost a few bigger edits along with my connection!  It went down entirely for a bit today, so my edits on 'horse breeding' are pretty random.  I've run out of time now, but I will get back to it tomorrow: I want to merge your stuff in a bit (and I've got a few more references to complement it).Gwinva 17:26, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the remaining sandbox sections on work horses and women are both almost ready to merge in, just see the inline comments I have in those sections.  Stylistically, they are pretty close to done...or as done as anything ever gets in Wikipedia!Montanabw 20:05, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Assorted comments

message: I have begun expanding the riding horse section, which includes hackneys.  That links to a disambiguation page.  There is a Hackney (horse), which refers to a particular breed. Shall I leave it unlinked and explain all on this page, or does it need a new article (eg 'Hackney (riding horse)' and the other moved to 'Hackney (horse breed)'?  From my limited knowledge of horses, I understand 'hackney' was used as a generic term in other eras also.?? Gwinva 11:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I made a small tweak to the bit on hackneys, indeed there is room for confusion, but I see little way around it, maybe what I added helped.  As for the rest, will look at it later tonight. Montanabw 22:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Hackney

message: Title:'Horses in the Middle Ages: Western Europe'
===Transportation===
(Edited section and moved it to the main article, other than the bit on lead and trace horses below)
Lead horses were worth more than trace horses. 
===Equestrian equipment and technological innovations===
The development of horse technology proceeded at a similar pace as the development of horse breeding and utilisation. The change in warfare during the Early Middle Ages to heavy cavalry both precipitated and relied on the arrival of the stirrup, saddle and horseshoe from other cultures. The increased use of the stirrup from the eighth century on aided the warrior's stability and security in the saddle when fighting. This probably lead to greater use of shock tactics, although it remains possible to use a couched lance effectively without stirrups.Alvarez, Richard. "Saddle, Lance and Stirrup: An Examination of the Mechanics of Shock Combat and the Development of Shock Tactics" published on Classical Fencing website accessed 8 March 2007
The invention of the nailed horseshoe in the late ninth century enabled longer, faster journeys on horseback, particularly in the wetter lands in northern Europe, and campaigns on varied terrains.
From the twelfth century, the high war-saddle became more common, providing protection as well as added security.
More on bits and bridles...
:Two problems, though not insolvable:  1) Styles and types of Medieval tack is a whole new article in itself.  Problem 2) is that your source is not entirely accurate (Some medieval researchers can be a little bit Eurocentric), see stirrup and saddle as well as the shorter notes in the technology section in horses in warfare. The Stirrup was invented in India and China almost a thousand years before it got to the west, (seems to have arrived in western Europe with the Arabs, circa 8th century, but also from the east with the Mongols, perhaps even earlier) the horseshoe also was already invented, though may be worth looking at that technology to check details.  The firm tree saddle was invented during the Roman empire, circa 200 AD.  The only real innovation was the invention horse collar. Well, and the sidesaddle...Arguably, the deep-seated saddle was also a noticable stylistic change...and with it the la brida style of riding, which is a topic I am supposed to be doing an article on, one of these days...sigh...
:Actually three problems, most "innovations" in medieval equipment were most notable for their brutality... This was one of the areas where the Renaissance and Enlightenment really were, at least as far as horses were concerned!  Montanabw 00:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps I'll leave you to write the section, then... ! (smile) I was just throwing down a few rough references as I came across them: I'm prepared for them to be wrong! Clark's Medieval Horse has heaps of archeological data, and I've found Hyland's Medieval Warhorse.  Eurocentric's ok (grin): we did mention this article was about Europe.  I know there are the main articles at stirrup etc, but it's worth summarising some of the pertinent stuff here, as it did effect the way they rode and fought (says she who's only been on a horse once). And, yes, horse collar comes here too.  Perhaps harnessing? The tandem style in the pictures linked below is not commonly seen now?!  Hey, if Medieval tack's a whole new article, then start it! I'm sure you could spend more time at the computer!! Gwinva 17:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sandbox for revisions

message: The development of horse technology proceeded at a similar pace as the development of horse breeding and utilisation. The change in warfare during the Early Middle Ages to heavy cavalry both precipitated and relied on the arrival of the stirrup, saddle and horseshoe from other cultures. The increased use of the stirrup from the eighth century on aided the warrior's stability and security in the saddle when fighting. This probably lead to greater use of shock tactics, although it remains possible to use a couched lance effectively without stirrups.Alvarez, Richard. "Saddle, Lance and Stirrup: An Examination of the Mechanics of Shock Combat and the Development of Shock Tactics" published on Classical Fencing website accessed 8 March 2007
The invention of the nailed horseshoe in the late ninth century enabled longer, faster journeys on horseback, particularly in the wetter lands in northern Europe, and campaigns on varied terrains.
From the twelfth century, the high war-saddle became more common, providing protection as well as added security.
More on bits and bridles...
:Two problems, though not insolvable:  1) Styles and types of Medieval tack is a whole new article in itself.  Problem 2) is that your source is not entirely accurate (Some medieval researchers can be a little bit Eurocentric), see stirrup and saddle as well as the shorter notes in the technology section in horses in warfare. The Stirrup was invented in India and China almost a thousand years before it got to the west, (seems to have arrived in western Europe with the Arabs, circa 8th century, but also from the east with the Mongols, perhaps even earlier) the horseshoe also was already invented, though may be worth looking at that technology to check details.  The firm tree saddle was invented during the Roman empire, circa 200 AD.  The only real innovation was the invention horse collar. Well, and the sidesaddle...Arguably, the deep-seated saddle was also a noticable stylistic change...and with it the la brida style of riding, which is a topic I am supposed to be doing an article on, one of these days...sigh...
:Actually three problems, most "innovations" in medieval equipment were most notable for their brutality... This was one of the areas where the Renaissance and Enlightenment really were, at least as far as horses were concerned!  Montanabw 00:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps I'll leave you to write the section, then... ! (smile) I was just throwing down a few rough references as I came across them: I'm prepared for them to be wrong! Clark's Medieval Horse has heaps of archeological data, and I've found Hyland's Medieval Warhorse.  Eurocentric's ok (grin): we did mention this article was about Europe.  I know there are the main articles at stirrup etc, but it's worth summarising some of the pertinent stuff here, as it did effect the way they rode and fought (says she who's only been on a horse once). And, yes, horse collar comes here too.  Perhaps harnessing? The tandem style in the pictures linked below is not commonly seen now?!  Hey, if Medieval tack's a whole new article, then start it! I'm sure you could spend more time at the computer!! Gwinva 17:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Equestrian equipment and technological innovations

message: Tournament The researchers also tested historic artifacts and found that the medieval war saddle within the armoury fits one of their smaller horses perfectly.
Breeding Other modern breeds, including the Shire and Frisian also claim such descent.
 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gwinva (talk • contribs) 19:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Other useful points awaiting references

message: Check this out:
http://www.imh.org/imh/kyhpl2a.html
International Museum of the horse.  Good history section, explains much about Destriers, etc... I have no time to steal from it now, but FYI and help yourself! Montanabw 20:24, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GOOD SOURCE! 

message: I have quickly browsed commons and found an assortment of pictures.  I see you have added a painting of the battle of Tours.  It's a nineteenth century painting, so probably not too accurate with the horse. One of these might be better (although they don't relate specifically to battle mentioned in text). Gwinva 13:11, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good collection and I like parking them here for review.  I say do whatever you want, it's all good.  I wouldn't be adverse to replacing the jousting photo with something more historic, personally. BTW, don't be too hung up on Clark, he's just one researcher.  Just like the average lifespan of people in the Middle Ages might have been 45 but some folks lived to be 80, just because most horses were 14 hands doesn't mean they all were. Some could have been 16 hands. Remember that Henry VIII wanted all his horses over 15 hands, so there had to be enough already for that decree to be somewhat possible to fullfill! Montanabw 19:37, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Pictures

message: Good to bump into you tonight!  Article is looking good; as you've seen, I've added links and played around a bit.  To be comprehensive, we should cover some of the info about saddles, bridles etc etc, plus horse transports. Threw a few ideas down in sandbox, but only a rough start. Will get back to it tomorrow, perhaps.  Gwinva 22:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course they were hot-blooded. Nicolle (p266) refers to early European horses (outside Spain) as all cold blooded, with the destriers so prized because they had Spanish and Arabian blood.Gwinva 13:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Hey, thanks for the answer! (again).  Talking of historians never talking to horse people, have you read any of Ann Hyland's books? A horse-expert and historian!! Very good.  Following on from discussion a long way back up the page somewhere (!) about horse tack, which I partially answered up there yesterday, I've been reading Clark's sections on it.  He writes a very long and detailed explanation about why horseshoes can't be confidently dated to Roman times, but can be dated from the 10th century. I'll have to check Hyland, she covers the Muslim world as well in her books Gwinva 08:31, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Progress

message: I was going to add the following to the breeding section:
:In England, a common source of warhorses were the wild moorland ponies, which were rounded up annually by horse-breeders, including the Cistercians, for use as campaign riding horses, or light cavalry; one such breed was the Fell pony, which had some Frisian ancestry.
However, it perhaps contradicts your comment about <the Spanish Jennet, a forerunner to the modern Friesian and Andalusian horse.>, which suggests the Friesian was later? Hyland's ref above is for the thirteenth century.  Gwinva 22:56, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Horse breeding

message: I think it may work to merge the war and riding horse sections, need to configure the headings carefully, but yeah, I noticed that too.  I think that the article is close to a "done" status...we are talking about HORSES in the middle ages here, and although horses needed tack and horses WERE transport, those actually are separate articles in and of themselves.  If they get created, we can add "Main" tags here to link.  You could also eyeball the pages on saddle and stirrup and see if any good medieval material and links could be added the the history sections there.  Arguably, a better history section could also be created on the (already rather long) page bit (horse).
I'll root around with horseshoe stuff.  Not surprising there is a debate over the Roman invention of the horseshoe...There is a 2500 year discrepancy amongst scholars as to the date the horse was domesticated and if it was first ridden or driven (though every horseman on the planet KNOWS in their gut that the horse was ridden before it was driven and thus the earlier date is probably correct).  I'll see what I can dig up.
FYI, the daVinci sketches are in fact very akin to the modern Andalusian, stallions get "cresty" necks like that...and don't let the rest of the breeding stuff freak you out.  The 13th century is about when people started getting serious about tracking written pedigrees, the Spanish Andalusian can be tracked back that far.  If you said something like "Friesian-bred horses,"  that will make it just vague enough to cover any dispute over when the official "breed" got started.  Montanabw 00:25, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ok. I've added the moorland pony bit in, with vague Friesian reference. Rejigged the page a bit to lump all types together; see what you think, and change as necessary.  I know what you mean about horse transoprts getting off topic: I've copied the Horse transports stuff to Medieval horse transports, for somewhere to put it.  Someone at Medieval warfare might want it, or it could be moved and expanded into an all-era horse topic. Who knows, I might even expand it (!).  I've looked at the various tack pages as suggested: the history is a bit thin in places, so I might busy myself adding in references as appropriate.  Perhaps we just need some 'see also' links here.  There's also quite a bit of stuff about it on the cavalry, and medieval warfare pages, which probably needs making consistent.  I can feel another article coming on... Just what am I doing here??!! (grin).Gwinva 21:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Works for me, I tweaked the Hackney link, the heavy, full-sized hackney carriage horse is more comparable to the medieval hackney -- at least in build, than is the hackney pony, which is sort of the chihuahua (in temperament) of the pony world. ;-)  Montanabw 21:42, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Moving the horse transports stuff worked: the page has been expanded already, and nominated for DYK!! It's also been moved to Horse transports in the Middle Ages. Gwinva 20:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More yakking here 

message: Ok, this debate seems to have gotten a little bit acerbic. I think this is a great article, and I sure hope it passes GA nomination, I'd just like to say a few things:
1. The lead section is a bit short, and doesn't seem to follow WP:LEAD as a "concise overview of the article".
2. There should be seperate 'notes' and 'reference' sections. A seperate reference section is good for anyone looking for further reading. And though the 'a b c d...'-format works well for web sites, when it comes to books, there should really be seperate notes leading to seperate page numbers.
3. While I appreciate the inclusion of Prestwich's Armies and Warfare, I'm missing what is probably the best book written on medieval warhorses in recent years: Andrew Ayton's Knights and Warhorses: Military Service and the English Aristocracy under Edward III.
Good Luck! Lampman 00:52, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Lampman and Gwinva, I'll break out notes and references, though I am a little fuzzy on the difference...if by "references" you essentially mean a bibliography, I get it.  As for the notes, there a simpler way to cite page numbers than having to include the whole bibliographical citation each time?  As in "Gies, p. 2" or something?  Got a helpful wikilink to policy on that one?  We stuck the page numbers in embedded comments in case we DID need them, so that won't be horribly hard to do, just painstaking and time-consuming. Montanabw 06:33, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Gwinva, I think I'll leave you to look over the intro for now.  I am terrible at intros.  Montanabw 06:33, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've changed the footnote style; it seems easier to read.  Noticed that a few of refs haven't got page nos: see if you can add any.  I'll fiddle around with the intro later, but right now I've run out of time.Gwinva 12:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA nomination