Horses in the Americas

Let's say the Vikings bring horses to their mainland American Colonies and the Vikings die out/been forgotten and the horses ended up among the Native Americans.

A). How likely is it that horses reach Mexico by the 14th century?

B). How much does it alter OTL Aztecs, Mayans and Incas (if the latter reaches Peru as well...)

C). How well would the Natives be with horses vs the Europeans?

D) (bonus). How well would Elephants perform in Central and South American Civilizations?
 
Not knowing what a horse was or their potential for domestication, most natives would simply have hunted them to extinction, unless some natives saw the Vikings with the horses and sought to duplicate what they saw,
 
Not knowing what a horse was or their potential for domestication, most natives would simply have hunted them to extinction, unless some natives saw the Vikings with the horses and sought to duplicate what they saw,
Well that is the idea. They see vikings and want it for themselves. Vikings get extinct but the horses are adopted by the locals.
 

SwampTiger

Banned
I don't see this happening with a defunct Norse settlement. The Norse would bring fewer horses than the Spanish. The Spanish in New Mexico brought several hundred horses into the colony of New Mexico upon arriving. They remained in the colony for 80 years before the revolt. The Pueblo taught the Apache, Ute and other tribes how to ride. Would the Norse bring enough horses into the St. Lawrence valley to promote the same? When did eastern tribes such as the Iroquois first receive horses?
 
IIRC Spanish horses, which provided the main stock for Amerindian horses, are not as cold tolerant as Scandinavian horses are. This would be very good for horse breeding, since you don't have the problem of winters on the Northern Plains decimating the horse stock forcing groups like the Sioux, Cheyenne, Blackfoot, etc. to trade with (or raid) the Comanche, Kiowa, etc. for horses. This gives a greater strength to the Northern Plains. The extra few centuries gives the entire Americas more of a time to develop a sustainable model for harvesting bison, since OTL they tended to believe bison were supernaturally spawned and thus suffered famine when they overharvested bison in famine years (and worse, when the bison were targeted for game hunting as a means to destroy the locals as OTL). It's noted that the sudden abundance the Plains Indians had of bison when they gained horses compared to what they had before led them to an unsustainable harvest (noted in Euroamerican sources where they'd be dominant and powerful in some years yet be a starving and miserable people in other years), which they had to supplement with violence against other American Indians or Euroamericans, like in Spanish New Mexico or Tejas--the Pawnee IIRC voluntarily accepted US rule since they were so scared of the Sioux, and other peoples likewise expressed or were described as utterly subjugated. It helps the Lakota if they don't need to worry about planting crops much, since they can tell their vassals like the Mandan to give them those crops (in exchange for bison parts).

But horses in the Mississippian civilisation will change a lot. OTL, even groups like the Cayuse and Nez Perce were good horsemen despite being far from the Plains. I think the South and Midwest provide plenty of room for horsemanship. That could lead to local Mississippian chiefdoms expanding their influence far beyond what they otherwise could. It would be spread to the Plains, which will spread to Northern Mexico and beyond (whoever rules the Valley of Mexico, like the "Toltecs", will be invaded and conquered by these "Chichimecs"). You could have an earlier Plains Indian sort of culture, like the later Apache, Comanche, IIRC, which TTL would be mostly Caddoan in language and culture. The Mississippians would now have horses, which could innovate plows, and also provide a good food animal. Horses will be used for riding, draft usage, and food. This will strengthen the Mississippians, and make them much stronger when they meet Europeans.
 
Last edited:

SwampTiger

Banned
As far as I know, none in OTL. They did bring cattle. If they so desire, I could see several dozen by 1020 CE. The average farmer used oxen as cattle had more utility for small self-sustaining farms. Horses were a luxury. Once the population of the colony exceeded a thousand, or was raided often by natives, horses would grow in usage. Horses were increasingly used in plowing at this time.
 
Let's say the Vikings bring horses to their mainland American Colonies and the Vikings die out/been forgotten and the horses ended up among the Native Americans.

Let's take this one at a time.

A). How likely is it that horses reach Mexico by the 14th century?

This came up in a recent thread. IMO, it's not likely. If horses do reach Mexico by that time, they will be kept as exotic oddities by the elite, and won't have time to become a transformative addition to the Mesoamerican agricultural package.

B). How much does it alter OTL Aztecs, Mayans and Incas (if the latter reaches Peru as well...)

Very little, if at all.

C). How well would the Natives be with horses vs the Europeans?

IMO, pretty well. Simply having fought against people who use horses will put the natives on much surer footing versus cavalry once the Europeans arrive. Having horses as livestock for their labor, meat, and hide (which removes the population constraint of having to hunt deer for winter clothes) increases the native population. Even if they are conquered, the eastern seaboard in this ATL looks more like Mexico, with the vast majority of people of mixed European/Native American descent, and a stronger Native American influence on the culture.

D) (bonus). How well would Elephants perform in Central and South American Civilizations?

IMO, pretty well. At the point in time of the Columbian contact I don't think elephants were the military trump card that they were during the ancient world, but they could provide valuable labor for the Native American civilizations. And as a species, wild elephants of either the African or the Asian variety would probably do quite well as a feral population in Central or South America.
 
Have a look at the Criollo horse from Argentina. In 1540, 12-40 horses escaped from a Spanish fort. By 1580 they multipled to 12,000 and within a century had grown to a population of hundreds of thousands. Initially the natives simply hunted them, but later they copied the Spanish guachos that worked to round up feral horses. Assuming the Norse settlers stick around long enough to inspire the natives to ride horses, I think this is plausible.

These cold climate adapted horses would be similar to the Icelandic Horse and do very well on the Great Plains, even better in Canada compared to Spanish horses. They will be less suited to Mexico, although Icelandic Horse stud farms exist in the Southwest and they are used for trail riding in tropical Hawaii. So I think its possible the Aztecs would have them, if only to counter their northern neighbors like the Chichimeca who would adopt the horse first. But they would be still be starting to get aquainted with mounted warfare by early 16th century. There’s practically no chance the Incas would have horses by then.

If the Norse also introduced other domesticates like cattle, sheep, goats and pigs that would greatly improve native resilience to European diseases; for population recovery not disease immunity.
 
If the idea is given to the native that it is possible to ride an animal then a Bison might be a possibility too, they can run as fast as horses, jump and are very strong.
 
Have a look at the Criollo horse from Argentina. In 1540, 12-40 horses escaped from a Spanish fort. By 1580 they multipled to 12,000 and within a century had grown to a population of hundreds of thousands.

Thank you for this information. I was going to model the population growth and would not have come close to this number a hundred years, or even two hundred years later. In additon to being initisly meat for native tribe, there are stil more predators. Regardless, the population size quoted is substantial.

The question now becomes what is the carrying capacity eastern Canada for feral horses? Not accouting for the expedited distances realized between different peoples, at what pace would the feral horsrs expand?
 
Top