Camels in Europe?

[ninebucks]

What would it take to make camels as ubiquitous in Europe as they are in the Middle East? Either as a beast of burden, or as a food source.

What effects would this have?

[Keenir]

Originally Posted by ninebucks

What would it take to make camels as ubiquitous in Europe as they are in the Middle East?

in the Orientalist view, or in reality?

Either as a beast of burden, or as a food source.

does it have to be a camel? the Sivatheres were fairly camel-like....despite being giraffids.

[Faeelin]

It's an interesting thought. Camels would do well in the same sorts of places mules and donkeys do. Iberia, Southern Italy and Sicily, the Balkans...

Probably some level of improved standard of living in the pre-industrial era. And then, they're transports to America by the Spanish...

[Dave Howery]

I think you'd either have to do away with horses or turn Europe into a desert. Camels have their uses, but in the fertile lands of Europe, horses are better...

[Faeelin]

Originally Posted by Dave Howery

I think you'd either have to do away with horses or turn Europe into a desert. Camels have their uses, but in the fertile lands of Europe, horses are better...

In Northern Europe, sure. But let's remember that they were using Sicily and Spain as stand-ins for the old West.

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Originally Posted by Dave Howery

I think you'd either have to do away with horses or turn Europe into a desert. Camels have their uses, but in the fertile lands of Europe, horses are better...

Hmm. Camels would probably be slightly disadvantages in areas where there are good roads and dense populations, but elsewhere they are superior to even wheeled vehicles. In the areas other posters mentioned they would probably have been very successful.

Camels aren't just desert animals - they are just able to withstand arid environments way better than other beasts of burden.

[8Deer]

It depends on what kind of camel: Bactrian camels are better suited a steppe environement, with lots of grass and open space. Dromedaries are found in the wild only in desert areas, so they would probably do pretty poorly in the temperate climate of most of Europe, not to mention the cold northern part.

I think Bactrian camels would do better in a European climate, however I'm pretty sure that Dromedaries are better for battle and such...

[Nikephoros]

Originally Posted by 8Deer

I think Bactrian camels would do better in a European climate, however I'm pretty sure that Dromedaries are better for battle and such...

The Arabs never really used them for battle anyways, but rather for transportation.

[Dave Howery]

horses are faster, easier to handle, and IIRC, mature faster than camels. Plus, they were bred to pull plows and wagons. Camels are more useful for certain things, but in Europe, horses are better. Otherwise, camels would have been used more often.

[Faeelin]

Originally Posted by Dave Howery

Otherwise, camels would have been used more often.

Isn't that a bit like saying Potatoes wouldn't have made a difference in Roman agriculture, because they would have been eaten if they had?

I can think of several reasons why camels may not have been used OTL.

[carlton_bach]

Camels were imported into Europe at various times and used, but they never gained any foothold. I suspect that is partly because of climate (much of Europe is too wet for camels to feel at home), partly because of their purpose (Southern Europe doesn't really have the long, arid overland routes that camels are so good for, almost anywhere is cheaper to reach by sea or river), and partly because of culture (the Med is donkey country). It was tried, though.

[Hendryk]

Originally Posted by 8Deer

It depends on what kind of camel: Bactrian camels are better suited a steppe environement, with lots of grass and open space. Dromedaries are found in the wild only in desert areas, so they would probably do pretty poorly in the temperate climate of most of Europe, not to mention the cold northern part.

I think Bactrian camels would do better in a European climate, however I'm pretty sure that Dromedaries are better for battle and such...

There are places in Europe suitable for Bactrian camels, such as Ukraine and Hungary. I'm sure they wouldn't fare too badly in Castille, either. But what would really be interesting, is to have them brought over to the Americas. They'd do great in the Argentinian pampa, the Altiplano, not to mention the colder regions of the Western US.

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Originally Posted by Dave Howery

horses are faster, easier to handle, and IIRC, mature faster than camels. Plus, they were bred to pull plows and wagons. Camels are more useful for certain things, but in Europe, horses are better. Otherwise, camels would have been used more often.

Their speed advantage for horses is not that great except for individual transport, and a camel can carry way, way, more than a horse. If camels had been around before the Roman Empire the situation might have been different; but as it is, the huge road system they built and was still in use through the medieval period, made horses and animals that could be hitched to carts more useful. In the Middle East, with it's sparse population, camels were actually a "tech upgrade", as they were superior to trying to maintain roads and using carts. Camels also provide an advantage for longer-distance travel, which the geography of Europe doesn't really support because the landmasses are so small with access to sea transport.

Also, especially in a densely populated area, you run into the problem that horses really hate camels and react very badly to them - one of the few military uses of camels being to disrupt cavalry formations.

The Achaemenid Persians experimented with armored camel cavalry, but it never really took off. It was pretty interesting - each camel carried two men - a driver/archer, and a rear archer.

[mojojojo]

Are camels harder to train and handle than horses? Or is that an exaggeration?

[bastian]

Originally Posted by ninebucks

What would it take to make camels as ubiquitous in Europe as they are in the Middle East? Either as a beast of burden, or as a food source.

What effects would this have?

I believe that the same was done to bring the monkeys to Gibraltar could bring the camels to Europe

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Originally Posted by mojojojo

Are camels harder to train and handle than horses? Or is that an exaggeration?

Horses can do more than camels - camels are less dangerous than horses, but also more stubborn. Their care is a lot different, so it requires much different skills and knowledge. For instance, horses generally pull cargo on a cart, whereas camels carry their loads directly - that leads to sores which get infected if you don't take proper care of them. People who don't know camels always end up having them all die off, which is a reason why they weren't more widely adopted - switching animals entails a large "capital cost", which is difficult and usually fails, at least at first.

[Dave Howery]

Originally Posted by Faeelin

Isn't that a bit like saying Potatoes wouldn't have made a difference in Roman agriculture, because they would have been eaten if they had?
.

no, because the Romans didn't have access to potatoes, whereas Europe did have access to camels, and never made much use of them.

Also, especially in a densely populated area, you run into the problem that horses really hate camels and react very badly to them - one of the few military uses of camels being to disrupt cavalry formations.

actually, it's horses that weren't used to camels who were so disrupted by them. Horses can be acclimated to camels, just like they can be to gunfire, it just takes training...

[Rakhasa]

Spain DID import camels, and more than once (remember she had at least one muslim country for eight centuries), but they simply never caught on. And Spain is the only european country arid enough for camels -but it also has great mountain ranges crisscrossing the country. Horses, oxen and donkeys are much better than camels for the climate

[Dave Howery]

IIRC, wild camels are/were (not sure how many are left these days) specialized for living in dry areas, but they ranged from very hot to very cold areas, so Europe's cold weather wouldn't faze them... I wonder if the heavier rain and snow might not be a problem though; animals suited for cold dry areas don't do well when their hides get soaked...

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Originally Posted by Dave Howery

no, because the Romans didn't have access to potatoes, whereas Europe did have access to camels, and never made much use of them.


actually, it's horses that weren't used to camels who were so disrupted by them. Horses can be acclimated to camels, just like they can be to gunfire, it just takes training...

Yes, I know, but it's not convenient and consumes resources that is a mark against camels - you can't really use both for domestic purposes economically.

Europe didn't really have access to camels until the Dark Ages when they were introduced into the Middle East and North Africa... not the most syncretic time of our history. Frankly, camels are weird and off-putting to people that aren't used to them.

They are pretty much the only animal that has managed to supercede wheeled vehicles - it was only in densely populated areas of the Mid East where wheeled vehicles could be economically reintroduced before cars and trucks.

Camels are quieter, more "intelligent" and a lot calmer, but they need the company of other camels, which is a disadvantage in Europe where small farming was predominant.