Increasing interest in horses—Herodotus; Thucydides; war chariots
of the Persians—Horses represented on coinage—Wooden horse of
Troy—The Parthenon frieze; Greek art—Plato; white horses—The
procession of Xerxes; horses and men sacrificed—The horse of
Darius—Horse racing introduced among the Romans—Xenophon and
Simo—Early horseshoes, bits and bitting; ancient methods of
mounting
As we gradually approach the time of Christ we find increasing
interest being taken in horses by the kings and great chiefs of
different countries, for the value of cavalry in war was now quickly
becoming manifest.
In the early days of the Homeric or Iron Age the Celts of Noricum and
the Danube, though still retaining chariots, had begun to ride on
horseback, and by the third century B.C. these Celtic tribes already
possessed well-trained and very formidable cavalry. As a natural
result the demand for still better horses grew steadily, and soon it
became common to import horses into the Upper Balkan, and countries
beyond the Alps, from the Mediterranean area.
Perhaps the best description of a chariot race at Delphi is to be
found in the _Electra_ of Sophocles—Sophocles flourished in the third
century B.C. At about the same period Herodotus tells us that the
Sigynnæ, the only tribe north of the Danube that he mentions by name,
had “horses with shaggy hair five fingers long all over their bodies.”
These horses were “small and flat-nosed and incapable of carrying men,
but when yoked under a chariot were very swift.”
Consequently the natives drove them largely in chariots.
Though Herodotus does not allude to the colour of these small,
flat-nosed horses, there is reason to believe that dun was the colour
most prevalent at about this time. With regard to the horses of
Northern Britain Dio Cassius says that two of the chief tribes—namely,
the Caledonians and the Mæatæ—“went to war in chariots, as their
horses were small and fleet,” while when the Gauls passed into Italy,
towards the beginning of the fourth century B.C., they drove chariots
but did not ride, in which respect they resembled the Sigynnæ north of
the Danube.
Thucydides, writing at the end of the third century B.C., speaks with
interest on the subject of horses' hoofs, pointing out that the reason
so many of the cavalry horses of the Athenians went lame towards the
close of the Peloponnesian War was not that they had been wounded,
as some historians have averred, but owing simply to their not being
shod. This was after the Spartans had occupied Decelea and suffered
their heavy loss.
Alcibiades, in the third century B.C., had many horses, and in the
sixth book of “Thucydides” he tells us in his speech that he sent into
the lists no less than seven chariots, adding that “no other man ever
did the like”; and later he goes on to mention that he won the first,
second and fourth prizes.
Apparently Alcibiades knew his world, and if so it would seem that his
world was not unlike the world we know to-day, for in another passage
he sententiously yet philosophically tells us that we “must not expect
to be recognised by our acquaintance when we are down in the world;
and on the same principle why should anyone complain when treated with
disdain by the more fortunate?”
This particular sentence is according to the translation of
“Thucydides” by the late Professor Jowett, who leaves us to infer what
we please concerning the sociological views held by Alcibiades.
Among the first to employ war chariots with scythes intended to mow
down the enemy were the Persians, if historical records are to be
trusted, and we read that the chariots they used in the battle of
Cunaxa, in 401 B.C., were provided with sharp blades, while in after
years the people of Syria had war chariots with spears as well as
scythes.
Thus in the bloody battle fought between Eumenes of Pergamus, and
Antiochus of Syria, to mention but a single instance, Antiochus had
four-horse chariots with scythes and spears in his front line of
battle, whereupon Eumenes purposely “created terror” amongst these
horses, with the result that they turned suddenly and dashed back into
the lines of Antiochus, spreading devastation and death on all sides
in their own ranks.
Certain it is that upon that occasion many horses were cut to pieces
by the scythes, but for a full and graphic description of what
happened I must refer the reader to the thirty-seventh chapter of the
immortal “Livy.”
* * * * *
The esteem in which horses, especially war horses, were held in the
centuries that immediately preceded the coming of Christ may to some
extent be gathered from the prominence accorded to them when coins to
be used as the circulating medium began to come into general vogue.
Thus on the first of the Carthaginian coins—they were struck in the
third century B.C.—we find represented a horse upon one side, a
palm-tree upon the other, while on the coins of the important Sicilian
settlement, Panormus, a horse is shown.
I have tried to disentangle from a mass of only semi-trustworthy
records the true origin of the well-known saying: “He has Seius' horse
in his stable.” So far as one can ascertain, it is traceable to the
fates of the various ill-starred owners of the horses of Gnæus Seius,
from Seius down to Anthony. Plutarch says that the famous Philip II.
loved to commemorate his Olympian victories by stamping the figure of
a steed upon some of his coins, and certainly he was devoted both to
horses and horse racing. We read too that between 359 and 336 B.C. he
entered both chariots and riding horses for the Olympian competitions.
[Illustration: GREEK COINS SHOWING HORSES IN THE EARLY CENTURIES
BEFORE CHRIST
_1, 3. Agrigentum. 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9. Syracuse. 8. Asia Minor and
Greece. Philip of Macedon. 10. Hellenestic period. Hiero of Sicily_]
Similarly a proportion of the Sicilian coinage bore the impression
of a horse, and many of the great chariot races are commemorated on
coins. Several of the Agrigentine coins, for instance, show a quadriga
driven by winged Nike, in commemoration probably of the victory of
Exænetus, while some of the coinage of Syracuse dating back so far
as 500 B.C., and even earlier, represents a four-horse chariot upon
the face of the tetradrachms, and, on the didrachms, a man riding
one horse and leading another. Some of the drachms show merely a man
mounted.
Indeed we are told that Gela not only prided herself on her victories
won on the race track, but upon what was, of course, of more
importance—her splendid cavalry. A number of her coins represent
a four-horse chariot, some a two-horse chariot, and occasionally
a wounded foe being speared to death by a horseman, galloping or
stationary. These coins probably are among the earliest of their kind
ever struck.
The most ancient of all representations of Sicilian horses,
however, which serve to prove that the Sicilians were beyond doubt
a horse-loving race, is the quadriga on one of the metopes of the
archaic temple of Silenus, believed to have been founded in 628 B.C.
While upon the subject of sculpture, casual reference must be made
to the notorious Wooden Horse of Troy, described fully in Homer and
alluded to centuries later by Virgil, the horse of which the famous
sculptor, Strongylon, made a model in bronze towards probably the
close of the fifth century.
The story of this horse hardly needs repetition, but briefly it is to
the effect that soon after Hector's death Ulysses commanded Epeios
to construct a wooden horse of great size that ostensibly was to be
used as an offering to the gods to please them and thus ensure a safe
voyage back to Greece.
Unsuspectful of treachery, the Trojans received the great effigy and
brought it into their city; whereupon, in the dead of night, the Greek
soldiers hidden within it crept cautiously out, pounced silently upon
the Trojan guards and slew them before they could defend themselves;
then opened the gates of Troy, let in their own soldiery, and finally
set fire to the city.
Menelaus is said to have been among the Greeks concealed in the wooden
horse.
If evidence in addition to that already given be needed to prove that
the ancient Greeks held horses in high esteem, and that the Grecian
conquests were probably in a great measure due to the help afforded by
the possession of horses, notice has only to be taken of the vastness
of the space occupied by the Athenian cavalry shown on the Parthenon
frieze.
Indeed at about this period probably no accomplishment was quite so
highly esteemed as horsemanship, with the result that the wealthy
classes began to pay special attention to the training their sons
received in it, while treatises were published upon the art and how
best it might be acquired.
The first horsemen of whom we have indisputably authentic records
invariably rode bareback, and, with the exception of the Libyans,
used some sort of bit. According to Xenophon—and apparently no
other historian of his time is so thoroughly to be trusted for
strict accuracy—the Greeks of the fifth century B.C. were almost as
fastidious upon the subject of bits and bittings as some hunting men
of to-day are.
Some writers upon this subject have erred. Thus the impression is
prevalent that the horses of the ancient Greeks were all much smaller
than modern horses, and the steeds shown on the Parthenon frieze are
sometimes said to afford proof that this was so. A proportion of the
horses of those early times undoubtedly were smaller than the modern
horse is, but on the other hand plenty were not. Probably the mistaken
critics base their assertion upon the fact that the men shown on the
Parthenon frieze and similar compositions, also on some of the vase
paintings of that period, apparently are as tall as, or taller than,
the horses beside which they are standing or on which they are mounted.
The reason men and horses are so represented simply is that according
to a standard rule of ancient Greek art the heads of men and animals,
and of all other figures shown on such compositions, must be as nearly
as possible upon a level, even though some of the figures may be
standing, some seated, some on horseback, some in chariots.
This rule, known as “Isokelismos,” is of course in direct opposition
to the rule of nature, yet as it existed it had to be observed, and
therefore no attempt should ever be made to compare the height of men
or beasts shown in such representations as the Parthenon frieze merely
by the appearance and the proportions they present. By observing how
far below the horses' bellies the feet of the mounted men hang, an
approximate idea of the height of the men by comparison with that of
some of their horses may be arrived at.
* * * * *
Herodotus is of opinion that about the year 480 B.C. finer horses were
owned by the Nisæan than by any other people of Asia, and he mentions
that white horses were so highly valued by the Persians of about that
period—who are known to have used many white horses for sacrificial
purposes—that “some three hundred and sixty horses, or about one for
every day in the year, and five hundred talents of silver,” was the
tribute sent by the Sicilians. This statement leads to the conclusion
that white horses must have been exceptionally plentiful in the region.
That Armenia had many horses, which were largely used even so far
back as the fifth century B.C., can be gathered from the writings of
Ezekiel, for the prophet does not hesitate to declare that the people
of Togarmah, which presumably was part of Armenia, traded in the fairs
in horses and mules.
Pindar, who so glorified King Arcesilas, tells us that Cyrene became
famous as the city of steeds and goodly chariots, and later the poet
Callimachus sang of his home “famed for her steeds.” Hiero II. of
Syracuse owed practically all his great successes to the fact that
he owned horses of considerable value, and to this day figures in
marble of horses dedicated by him in commemoration of his victories at
Olympia are to be seen in the local museum of Delphi.
Almost every year attempts are made by wealthy Americans and others to
purchase some of these figures, but down to the present such attempts
have proved of no avail.
Plato, again, has much to say upon the horse in its relation to the
history of his epoch. Thus in one place he writes: “We must mount our
children on horses in their earliest youth, and take them on horseback
to see war, in order that they may learn to ride; the horses must not
be spirited or warlike, but the most tractable and yet the swiftest
that can be had; in this way they will get an excellent view of what
is hereafter to be their business; and if there is danger they have
only to follow their elder leaders and escape.”
Agrigentum—until 405 B.C., when it was destroyed by the
Carthaginians—was famous for its horses. It is said that on one
occasion, when one of the best-known citizens, Exænetus, won the
principal chariot race at Olympus, the entire population came forth
to meet him, and that he was preceded into the city by 300 chariots
drawn by pairs of white horses. Indeed some of the most gorgeous
monuments ever erected to the memory of famous race horses were
those raised in this city during the period of its splendour.
[Illustration: 1. THE EMPEROR TRAJAN. SHOWING ROMAN STYLE OF RIDING
2. THE EMPEROR THEODOSIUS. SHOWING SADDLE
3. A PARTHIAN HORSEMAN. SHOWING PARTHIAN STYLE OF RIDING BAREBACK
4. SARMATHIAN HORSE AND WARRIOR. MEANT TO REPRESENT HORSE AND RIDER IN
ARMOUR MADE OF PLATES OF BONE OR OF HORSE-HOOF]
* * * * *
We have it on good authority that, some centuries before Christ, the
Persian men of rank deemed it derogatory to be seen on foot, and that
they habitually rode on horseback. Yet in common with the people of
many other races they were addicted to immolating horses on festival
days, while the practices in which they indulged upon these occasions
are said to have been barbarous in the extreme.
In almost every age white horses in particular would seem to have been
used for sacrificial purposes. The Persians sacrificed bulls as well
as horses, a bull and a horse being sometimes bound together and then
immolated. Arrian mentions that one horse at least was sacrificed to
Cyrus every month, the ceremony being usually performed at Pasargadea,
close to the famous tomb. Here again white horses were used for the
sacrifices, for among the Persians in particular the white horse was
for many centuries deemed sacred and pronounced “beloved of the gods.”
One of the descriptions that probably gives a true account of a
triumphal march in the third century B.C. is that of Herodotus, where
he describes the procession of Xerxes. The following order, he tells
us, was observed.
There came first 1000 carefully selected horsemen, then 1000 carefully
selected spearsmen, then ten sacred Nisæan horses “splendidly
caparisoned.” These horses were called Nisæan, we are incidentally
told, because they were especially reared on the plains of Nisæa, in
Media, at that period famous for its great horses.
Next came the sacred car of Zeus, drawn by eight white horses
“followed by charioteers on foot holding their bridles, for no mortal
was allowed to mount the seat.” Xerxes himself brought up the train,
usually in a chariot drawn by Nisæan horses, with his charioteer
beside him.
* * * * *
The people of almost every nation of whom we have authentic records
would appear to have been addicted in the centuries before Christ
to the atrocious practice of sacrificing live horses to their gods.
Particulars of the weird rites observed in connection with these
sacrifices are for the most part too revolting to be described here,
but one practice observed by the Scythians cannot well be passed
unnoticed.
This people inhabited chiefly the treeless steppes of Asia, and is
known to have sacrificed animals of many kinds, but horses most of
all, and usually white or dun horses.
Thus we are told that when a Scythian king died, his favourite
horse, his favourite concubine, and several important members of his
establishment, preferably his cook and his cupbearer, were buried with
him. When a year had passed, a further ceremony took place.
This consisted in the execution, generally by strangulation, of some
fifty of the strongest, handsomest and generally most desirable young
men—probably young men who had belonged to his suite—and in the
strangulation also of an equal number of the best horses that had
belonged to him.
Then, without delay, the bodies of men and horses were disembowelled,
next they were stuffed with chaff or straw, and finally when the
horses, supplied each with a bit and bridle, had been set up in a
circle round the tomb of the deceased monarch, the bodies of the
slaughtered men were set astride them.
And there the ghastly squadron remained until it fell away to dust.
That the literary records in which these gruesome details are to be
found are accurate, has to some extent been proved by discoveries made
from time to time—as for instance at the opening of the great tumuli
in Russia about half-a-century ago.
Indeed during the thirteenth century A.D. ceremonies equally revolting
are known to have been performed regularly among the Tartars, while
at the funeral of Frederic Casimir, Commander of Lorraine, in 1781,
a horse was killed, and then buried with its master, and at even so
recent a date as the funeral of Li Hung Chang a horse and chariot
made of paper were, according to the newspaper reports, burned at
the grave-side—probably a last survival of some weird rite of a
sacrificial nature observed formerly in China and Japan.
Another race known to have immolated live horses, especially white
horses, was the Veneti. This people lived at the head of the Adriatic,
and their name survives to this day in “Venice.”
The sacrifice of white horses was common too amongst the Scandinavian
and the Teutonic races, and formed part of their religion. The
Sicilian Greeks, again, are said to have set a high value upon white
horses, and to have sacrificed them under the impression that by doing
so they afforded additional gratification to their gods.
It would appear, indeed, that in all ages white animals were looked
upon as sacred in a sense, for in parts of India the white elephant is
deemed sacred to this day, and in parts of Persia the white ass. Then,
in the fifth century B.C., the nomad Scythians, whose territories lay
chiefly to the north of the River Don, owned immense herds of horses.
These they used principally for food, while the milk of the mares they
drank and made domestic use of in other ways, a practice long in vogue
among the Turko-Tartaric tribes of Central Asia, and said to be still
in vogue with them in remote regions.
Bearing upon early Persia is rather a well-known story that on the
death of the famous Smerdis the seven princes who were his possible
successors agreed to confer the throne upon the owner of the horse
that should be the first to neigh when they all met on the following
day. The groom of Prince Darius having been told of this, had recourse
to a clever ruse, for on that same evening he led his master's horse
to the exact spot where the horses were all to meet on the day
following, and there showed the horse a mare. Upon arriving at this
spot next day the horse, as we are told, “neighed furiously,” so that
Darius won his kingdom!
We know that Hiero, King of Syracuse, who flourished towards the end
of the third and during the beginning of the second century, B.C.,
won the great Olympic crown with his good horse Phrenicus. In simple
language Tacitus describes how the people of Thurii—the city built on
the ruins of Sybaris about the year 443 B.C.—first taught horse racing
to the Romans.
Although towards the end of the second century B.C., bareback riding
was still quite common, a covering of some sort for the horse's back
was becoming much more popular among the Greeks despite the adherence
to bareback riding by the jockeys at the principal festivals.
Atiphanes, the “gentle humourist,” whose plays were performed in
public for the first time towards the close of the second century
B.C., alludes to “coverlets for a horse,” this being probably one of
the first references we have to saddles among the early Greeks.
* * * * *
And now we come to Xenophon, one of the most finished of horsemen
among the ancient Greeks, and apparently a true lover of horses. With
the exception of an individual named Simo, or Simon, who wrote before
Xenophon's time, there had not existed a man with deep and practical
knowledge of horses or horsemanship, and the care of horses, who was
able to write lucidly upon these subjects until Xenophon wrote with so
much success his own exhaustive work.
Xenophon speaks of Simo—who, according to Suidas, was by birth an
Athenian—on more than one occasion. Xenophon, however, did not hold
Simo in high esteem, as we may gather from the former's tone of
condescension when he states that though Simo wrote with some
knowledge of horses, yet that he entertained an exalted opinion of
himself that was unpardonable.
[Illustration: A PORTION OF THE PARTHENON FRIEZE, EXECUTED BY PHIDIAS
ABOUT THE YEAR 440 B.C.]
The truth of that statement is borne out by the evidence we have that
when, on a famous occasion, Simo presented the brazen horse to the
temple of the Eleusinian Ceres, at Athens, he had the effrontery to
engrave upon the pedestal his own works!
Though when expressing opinions upon the points of a horse the ancient
Greeks differed rather widely in their views, yet most of the rules
laid down by Xenophon are as applicable to-day as they were some three
and twenty centuries ago.
We read, for instance, that “the neck of the horse, as it proceeds
from the chest, should not fall forward, like that of a boar,
but should grow upward, like that of a cock, and should have an
easy motion at the parts about the arch.” That the advice was not
overlooked, even by early artists, can be accurately conjectured if
the Parthenon frieze be inspected, for there almost every horse shown
has a neck “like that of a cock.” Xenophon then proceeds:
“If a horse has the thighs under the tail broad and not distorted,
he will set his hind legs well apart, and will by that means have a
firmer and quicker step, a better seat for a rider, and be better in
every respect. We may see,” he continues, “a proof of this in men,
who when they wish to take up anything from the ground do try to raise
it by setting their legs apart rather than by bringing them together.”
These remarks are sensible, yet probably there are few modern horsemen
ready to admit that a horse's hoof should be high and hollow, and the
frog kept up from the ground “as well before as behind,” which was
Xenophon's opinion. Then in his time saddles and stirrups had not,
apparently, been thought of, for we read that when first introduced
they were looked upon with scorn, all who used them being laughed
at and deemed to take rank among what we should call in these days
“muffs.”
As already noted, Xenophon had something to say upon bits and bitting,
and he describes at length the advantages of the jointed over the
rigid bit. Also he alludes to the custom of wearing spurs, and
describes incidentally the construction of the prick spurs then in
vogue.
In this connection it is interesting to note that a bit was discovered
in the Acropolis of Athens some twenty years ago, which, so it is
said, dates back to the early Persian wars of 490-479 B.C.
* * * * *
Certain modern writers of books upon subjects more or less historical
speak of horse doctors. Some twenty-three centuries ago, however, even
the acknowledged experts upon horses and horse breeding would seem to
have possessed only crude anatomical knowledge of the animal, some
of the advice they tendered in cases of illness amongst horses being
grotesque.
Equally it is evident that professional horse breakers and trainers,
also professional riding masters, were known in Greece in Xenophon's
day, and possibly before his time.
There is something rather delightful about Xenophon's ingenuousness
when he tells us quite seriously that “a horse that has no longer the
marks in his teeth, neither rejoices the buyer with hope, nor is easy
to be exchanged”! He speaks too with emphasis when assuring us that
when carefully examining a horse with a view to purchase we ought to
pay most attention to the hoofs—advice to some extent discounted by
remarks he makes a few lines further on.
“To sum up all in a few words,” he says elsewhere, “whatever horse
has good feet, is mild-tempered, sufficiently swift, and able to
endure fatigue, and is in the highest degree obedient, will probably
give least trouble to his rider and contribute most to his safety
in military occupations. But horses that from sluggishness require
a great deal of driving, or, from excess of mettle, much coaxing
and care, afford plenty of employment to the rider, as well as much
apprehension in time of danger.”
The ancients evidently had a rooted antipathy to adopting any kind
of contrivance calculated to afford protection for their horses'
hoofs. Upon several occasions attempts were made to introduce metal
horseshoes, but in vain. The device most resembling a horseshoe, that
they were willing to consider and of which we have a trustworthy
description, was a covering not unlike a sandal made of reeds, or, in
rare instances, of leather. In reality it resembled a boot rather than
a horseshoe, but it was used only where the ground was very rough or
exceptionally hard.
In parts of Japan boots of this kind, made of straw, are worn to this
day. Berenger speaks of a horseshoe said to have been in use in the
time of Childeric, whose date was 481, A.D., and most likely it was
one of the first horseshoes, properly so called, of which any record
is extant.
If the figure of it preserved in Montfaucon's “Antiquities” is to be
relied upon for accuracy, then it somewhat resembled the shoe in use
to-day.
It seems clear that Xenophon was not an advocate for docking horses'
tails, at any rate to the exaggerated extent we so often see them
docked to-day, also that he was not partial to the hogged mane,
for in speaking of the horse's fore-lock, “while these hairs,” he
avers, “though of good length, do not prevent the horse from seeing,
they brush away from his eyes whatever annoys them. Therefore we may
suppose that the gods gave such hairs to the horse instead of the long
ears which they have given to asses and mules to be a protection to
the eyes.”
* * * * *
A question sometimes set when the subject of early horsemanship is
under discussion is: How used the ancients to mount, seeing that they
placed at best only cloths on their horses' backs, and that they had
not stirrups?
Historical records contain information upon the point, and we read
that in the centuries before Christ horses were mounted apparently in
three ways—by the rider's vaulting without assistance on to the back;
by his vaulting or mounting with the aid of a pole; by his making the
horse crouch.
There was a fourth way, but for an obvious reason it was less often
resorted to. This was by making a slave bend his back, or kneel on all
fours, and by then stepping upon him—using him as a mounting-block,
in short. The last-named method was common in Persia, where Sapor,
when he had conquered the Emperor Valerian, forced him thus to debase
himself to show his complete subjection.
I believe I am right in saying that the soldiery used sometimes to
mount with the aid of a spear. Xenophon, in his seventh chapter,
instructs the horseman to mount “by catching hold of the mane, about
the ears,” a feat surely impossible to perform save when mounting a
pony.
In the illustration of a Sarmatian on horseback, facing page 33, both
a man and horse are shown in armour made of horse-hoof cut into little
plates, which, Pausanias tells us in his Attics, were sewn together
with the sinews of oxen and horses. Sometimes bone was used in place
of horse-hoof, but iron never, there being no iron mines in the
country, to the knowledge of the Sarmatians. The soldier shown holding
up his horse's leg, in the illustration facing page 45, presumably is
about to tie on one of the “stockings” used in place of shoes; and on
the same plate a soldier is about to mount on the off (right) side.
[Illustration: ROMAN SOLDIER ABOUT TO ADJUST “STOCKING” USED IN PLACE
OF SHOES]
[Illustration: ROMAN SOLDIER ABOUT TO MOUNT ON OFF SIDE]
[Illustration: A MAURITANIAN HORSEMAN. SHOWING HOW THE MAURITANIANS
AND HUMIDIANS RODE WITHOUT SADDLE OR BRIDLE]