All horses die, 1200.

In 1200 horses all die due to a viral plague, all donkeys, burros, mules (if there were any), even the zebra and Oryx, all the Equines are extinct. Nothing else is affected by the virus. What would happen?

I expect this to be ASB territory.

It could possibly happen, although it's incredibley unlikely, so it's not ASB

NapoleonXIV said:

In 1200 horses all die due to a viral plague, all donkeys, burros, mules (if there were any), even the zebra and Oryx, all the Equines are extinct. Nothing else is affected by the virus. What would happen?

Click to expand...

The problem with 1200 is how you get it around the world, especially without the disease burning itself out

I could imagine it afflicting Eurasia perhaps, at the height of the Mongol Conquest - ironically, as it would stop them dead, but too late in the day if you wish for this scenario to go ahead

Grey Wolf

NapoleonXIV said:

In 1200 horses all die due to a viral plague, all donkeys, burros, mules (if there were any), even the zebra and Oryx, all the Equines are extinct. Nothing else is affected by the virus. What would happen?

Click to expand...

wow, that'd have to be one big supervirus to be so lethal to so many different species. Well, Eurasian civilization would be hit hard for a long time... until they bred various breeds of oxen to take the place of horses, I suppose. Uh, isn't the Oryx a species of desert antelope? Did you mean the Onager maybe?

Three words: Big Ass Dogs. Like they used to use in Holland to draw carts.

Maybe the Eurasians could learn a new variety of animal husbandry from the Lapps, Nenets, and other reindeer herders.

Just had a thought: Dogs are "unclean" in Islam. Wouldn't the Islamic world be stuck with a definite "Dog gap" during the medieval cold war? Don't tell me big mastiffs wearing armor wouldn't be an effective battle weapon in a world without horses.

Large Dogs, indeed! I don't know if it would be possible to breed dogs to the size of horses, even over several generations, but if it were, and completed by the 1600s, how would this change warfare. After all, dogs are much more intelligent than horses. They actually form emotional / pack bonds with people. They're more agressive than horses...and their claws and teeth...similarly enlarged...would be even more effective against human flesh than they are today. Their sense of smell - combined with their ability to be trained - could be used to detect and defeat ambush, and pursue enemies even in the night.

'Dog Calvalry' might become the only worthwile military unit until the invension of the machinegun.

Giant canines are the equivalent of horses in 'The General' series of books by S.M. Sterling and David Drake. However in that science fiction series the story is set in the distant future on one particular world following the collapse of a human interstellar empire. Very good series, but awfully predictable by the third book.

I'm not sure if you could ever breed dogs that were large enough to have people ride around on. Even in OTL, the largest breeds of dogs (such as Great Danes and St. Bernards) tend to have shorter lifespans than smaller breeds and suffer from more health problems. There may be an effective upper limit to size beyond which most dogs would die before they were even full grown.

OTL some societies did use war dogs. The Spanish particularly were said to use them often against different native groups in the Americas, often with devastating effect. Against better armed and armored opponents in the Old World, though, they seem to have had a very limited effect, although they were extremely useful for tracking.

I've read some of those later books, and in mentioned that the Hero...Raj I believe...rode giant dogs back on his world. It didn't hint as to if the Dog Calvalry was any different in character, whatsoever, than Horse Calvalry would have been. (Camel Calvalry is a bit different than Horse Calvalry, due to their temperment, increased stamina and reduced speed. I think the difference between horse and dog calvalry would be even grander)

Well, eventually one could ride elephants or ostriches. One possibility may be the giant moa, if one gets to New Zealand before they become extinct. Gazelle could be domesticated if given time (a lot of it).

Camels aren't equines, are they?
Although European climes might be a little wet for their tastes, I don't see any obstacle to two-hump camels eventually being brought to Europe by the Mongols or the Turks. China and India already have them, and the Middle East and Africa have the single-hump variety.

I read somewhere that horses have been bred to be able to support humans - originally they could only draw chariots and were relatively weak. Then with selective breeding for this they eventually became strong enough to support people, and then strong enough to support a knight in armour.

So if this is true I guess it is possible that dogs could be bred for humans to ride around on.

Also, in a reverse way, couldn't elephants be bred smaller to support humans? I think that the elephants that Hannibal and the Seleucids had were small (though perhaps thats because they were Indian not African?)

What about cattle ? A yak is essentially a hairy cow isn't it ? And don't some West Africans ride horned cattle ? And what is an oxen ?

Or perhaps deer ?

I wonder if you could selectively breed war sheep or war goats ??? After all, they do ride llamas...

Grey Wolf

It took 4000 years to turn wild ponies into Percherons. You aren't going to have rideable dogs before you have genetic engineering. Dogs which fight, rider or no, are an interesting possibility...but "mutiny" is much more likely and much more problematic than with a horse.

Elephants and camels, indeed. So the mongols perish unnoticed, and the Muslim and Indian worlds have temporary but pronounced military superiority. Can we see Turks taking Byzantium and the Balkans much earlier?

Cattle and oxen type animals are esily adapted to agricultural labor, but they are too slow, too stupid and too social to make cavalry.

ShawnEndresen said:

Elephants and camels, indeed. So the mongols perish unnoticed, and the Muslim and Indian worlds have temporary but pronounced military superiority. Can we see Turks taking Byzantium and the Balkans much earlier?

Click to expand...

Probably not, since 1200 AD Byzantium relied heavily on mercenaries and was apparently not as cavalry-dependent - not to mention that 1200 AD Turks probably would not have used that many camels to begin with; now the possibility of the Arab resurgence (since they apparently did use camelry to much greater extent) is something that should not be discounted, possibly Mameluke or Abbassid conquest of Anatolia...

In central and western Europe, pike tactics of the Swiss were just being developed, and first effective anti-cavalry tactics were being created, culminating with gunpowder, so this would mean Europe would be able to adopt fairly quickly; given that the mounted heavy cavalry was usually the ruling class (which maintained its position through military ability), with no horses the playing field is evened out, and we might see much greater social mobility much quicker than OTL, practically advancing the Renaissanse (with a bit of luck) by a good two centuries.

In China, given that there is no Mongol conquest, there is a possibility of much earlier Industrial Revolution, resulting in it becoming a world power before Europe has a chance to truly emerge. Elsewhere, naval power might become increasingly more important as it would provide an alternative to fast transportation offered by mounted armies (even heavily infantry-based armies were sometimes mounted on horses, donkeys, or mules to get to their destination much quicker, as in example of Basil II's Syrian campaign where he had to get his army from one end of his empire to the other in short order); Venice and Genoa might get a major advantage in Europe. England, should longbow development proceed as in OTL, is likely to crush heavy cavalry-dependent France that will be left without its chief advantage, should a Hundred Year War still occur.

Where things get interesting is in the discovery of the Americas. Without horse (although probably still with gunpowder, iron, and germs) whoever gets to the New World will not have as great of a military advantage against the natives (although, it would be fair to point they would still have significant advantage, but no longer in terms of shock cavalry troops or the speed with which cavalry-heavy army could move if needed).

Paul Spring said:

I'm not sure if you could ever breed dogs that were large enough to have people ride around on. Even in OTL, the largest breeds of dogs (such as Great Danes and St. Bernards) tend to have shorter lifespans than smaller breeds and suffer from more health problems. There may be an effective upper limit to size beyond which most dogs would die before they were even full grown.

OTL some societies did use war dogs. The Spanish particularly were said to use them often against different native groups in the Americas, often with devastating effect. Against better armed and armored opponents in the Old World, though, they seem to have had a very limited effect, although they were extremely useful for tracking.

Click to expand...

No, it actually isn't possible to breed dogs as large as horses. But it is possible to breed large cart-pulling dogs (about 300 lbs.). These were formerly used heavily among the poor in the Low Countries. My point was that while medieval transportation would be slowed down (a dog can't travel as fast as a horse) medieval warfare would probably adapt without cavalry. A large war dog can be trained to go after a foe's weapon arm, and if armored correctly can be spared a dagger thrust from the foe's other arm. The intelligence of a war dog would need to be bred up; the ideal war dog would have the personal loyalty of a rottweiler and the intelligence of a border collie. Dogs could also take down camel cavalry; I know for a fact four german shepards killed a healthy bull moose in Maine eight years ago.

I wonder what sort of dogs the new World Spanish used. Something like the huge, ferocious dogs of the Canary Islands, perhaps?

Elephants generally aren't bred in those areas where they are used... the people capture them in the wild. The reason is that it takes a long time to grow an elephant to maturity, and they eat a hell of a lot.
While cattle are generally slow, not all are. OK, we're talking 1200 (BC or AD?). Either way, the aurochs are still around. These cattle are damn big already (bulls reportedly stood 7' at the shoulder) and were pretty fast and agile, way more than a domestic cow. In any case, oxen are already used to pull wagons and plows... they wouldn't be all that speedy when ridden, but it could be done...

Well why don't you train oxen or kangaroos to be calvary, they would be pretty effective. The kangaroos could claw their enemies and move very vast, they could be used as support cavlary, chasing down the straglers after the batle is won, or use them to be a support for archers, great height etc.

Oxen could be used to charge through the enemy lines, the speed and the weight of them could be used to crash through the flank or rear of enemy formations. What would lso be an added advantage, is their height. They are small enough so if you fall off them you can get back onto them without much iffeculty. However, the enemy might capture it and use it to their own needs.