Prehistoric WI Eurasian steppe horses hunted to extinction instead of domesticated?

There is an assumption here that larger donkeys can be bred. Given the obvious advantages of doing so on OTL, why has it not been done?
Have you not heard of the Mammoth Jackstock?
American mammoth donkey
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
American mammoth donkey

American Mammoth donkeys
Other names Mammoth Jack (males)
Country of origin United States
The American mammoth donkey, commonly known as the mammoth jack, American mammoth or American mammoth jack, is a landrace of North American donkey, descended from multiple breeds of donkey imported to the United States. George Washington, with Henry Clay and others, bred for an ass that could be used to produce strong work mules. Washington was offering his jacks for stud service by 1788. Large breeds of asses were found in Kentucky by 1800.[1]

Breeds that influenced the mammoth jack include the Maltese donkey, Poitou donkey (also sometimes called the mammoth donkey), Andalusian donkey, Majorcan donkey and Catalan donkeys.[2] Males, called jacks, must be at least 14 hands (56 inches, 142 cm) and females, called jennies or jennets must be at least 13.2 hands (54 inches, 137 cm).[3][4]

Purebred and pedigreed specimens of the variety that conform to a published standard of characteristics are considered a formal breed, registered with the American Mammoth Jackstock Registry, commonly called by various names including American Mammoth Jackstock,[5] Mammoth Jack stock and Mammoth Jack. These breed designations may encompass females.

The largest living mammoth donkey, at 17 hands (68 inches, 173 cm), resides in Waxahachie, Texas.[6][7]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_mammoth_donkey

yeah we can, it will take a while but we can make very tall donkeys
 
Also people can drink donkey milk
Donkey milk (or ass milk/jenny milk) is the milk given by the domesticated donkey (Equus asinus). It has been used since antiquity for cosmetic purposes as well as infant nutrition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donkey_milk

I'd also say donkeys milk being the closest to human milk of all quadrupeds also influenced it's position as women's livestock. Centering the domestication as a "helper" of families and hearth I'd really challenge basic assumptions of ease in shifting power/prestige.

That's why the likelihood of it being taken "away" from women is even more unlikely. It's interwoven into traditional women economic models
 
No one is denying the importance of Donkey on everyday life, the problem is unlike Horse and the entire economy and society centered around them -it's never happened with donkey-.
Well, if you count the onager as a donkey--and it is very closely related--er, not so much. They were used in Sumeria to pull chariots, which is about as masculine and prestigious a thing as you can imagine, before the invention of actual horse cavalry (and there are suggestions that the Sumerians actually used donkeys, onagers being what they are). It looks to me that, people being people, they're going to experiment with using different animals in different roles, and if they don't have a better option than onagers (of all things) or donkeys, then, well, they're going to settle with donkeys, "women's animals" or not.

Besides, who other than you is saying that donkeys have to be "taken" away from women to also be used as a war mount and a general horse replacement? Did the existence of warhorses mean that peasants had their draft breeds "taken"? What about the use of oxen as draft animals for hauling military supplies, did that mean that they somehow became unavailable to the rest of the economy? I can see perfectly well a division between small, cheap, "women's" breeds that are the lifeblood of poor families and expensive, large, and prestigious "war" breeds that populate upper-class stable, even if you deny it. Not to mention that all of your opinions seem to be based on African pastoralists--how do they dictate what Europeans, Indians, or Chinese might do? Why wouldn't they experiment with what is, to them, just another draft animal?
 

Magical123

Banned
Nitpick, Egyptians didn't invent chariots. Popularized it, yes, invent, no. Whether donkeys are used for chariots depends on whether the culture that came up with them has access to donkeys, obviously.
Weren't the Egyptians themselves conquered by chariot riding Hyksos?
 
Well, if you count the onager as a donkey--and it is very closely related--er, not so much. They were used in Sumeria to pull chariots, which is about as masculine and prestigious a thing as you can imagine, before the invention of actual horse cavalry (and there are suggestions that the Sumerians actually used donkeys, onagers being what they are). It looks to me that, people being people, they're going to experiment with using different animals in different roles, and if they don't have a better option than onagers (of all things) or donkeys, then, well, they're going to settle with donkeys, "women's animals" or not.

Besides, who other than you is saying that donkeys have to be "taken" away from women to also be used as a war mount and a general horse replacement? Did the existence of warhorses mean that peasants had their draft breeds "taken"? What about the use of oxen as draft animals for hauling military supplies, did that mean that they somehow became unavailable to the rest of the economy? I can see perfectly well a division between small, cheap, "women's" breeds that are the lifeblood of poor families and expensive, large, and prestigious "war" breeds that populate upper-class stable, even if you deny it. Not to mention that all of your opinions seem to be based on African pastoralists--how do they dictate what Europeans, Indians, or Chinese might do? Why wouldn't they experiment with what is, to them, just another draft animal?
Sami had reindeer but did not ride them whereas Nenet did. Samburu subgroup Rendille walk their camels even though on special occasion like a wedding unlike the camel herding peoples who ride them.

Khoi rode cattle but Xhosa, Zulu and other South African Bantu did not.

The shift to mounts was radical, not necessarily easy or even practical given other pressures pivoting Donkey development.

I think if you want to ignore anthropology and make something unrealistic then by all means do so. Again I prefer to be in the realm of facts and precendent, that's where we differ.
 
Sami had reindeer but did not ride them whereas Nenet did. Samburu subgroup Rendille walk their camels even though on special occasion like a wedding unlike the camel herding peoples who ride them.

Khoi rode cattle but Xhosa, Zulu and other South African Bantu did not.

The shift to mounts was radical, not necessarily easy or even practical given other pressures pivoting Donkey development.

I think if you want to ignore anthropology and make something unrealistic then by all means do so. Again I prefer to be in the realm of facts and precendent, that's where we differ.
You must refuted your own point. Different cultures use the same animals in different ways.
There is precedent for using onagers to pull chariots, and it's not that hard to imagine the Sumerians, in the absence of horses, continuing to use onagers until they acquire donkeys from contact with northeast Africans, and put them to a very different purpose than the original culture. There is also a precedent for giant riding donkeys. Whoever starts using donkey chariots or riding donkeys first is going to have a serious military advantage over their neighbours, and it will likely spread from there.
 
You must refuted your own point. Different cultures use the same animals in different ways.
There is precedent for using onagers to pull chariots, and it's not that hard to imagine the Sumerians, in the absence of horses, continuing to use onagers until they acquire donkeys from contact with northeast Africans, and put them to a very different purpose than the original culture. There is also a precedent for giant riding donkeys. Whoever starts using donkey chariots or riding donkeys first is going to have a serious military advantage over their neighbours, and it will likely spread from there.
I did not refute my own point. I stated that even neighboring nations/peoples do not utilize animals in the same way. The precedent is not that SOMEONE did it, rather that just because someone does it doesn't mean others will follow.

I'd also argue that the trajectory of onager does not necessarily imply mounting would occur as we see that the horse was not a beast of burden at first but was rather a mount that became a beast of burden.

Again you're making baseless assumptions without contextualizing history.
 
I did not refute my own point. I stated that even neighboring nations/peoples do not utilize animals in the same way. The precedent is not that SOMEONE did it, rather that just because someone does it doesn't mean others will follow.

I'd also argue that the trajectory of onager does not necessarily imply mounting would occur as we see that the horse was not a beast of burden at first but was rather a mount that became a beast of burden.

Again you're making baseless assumptions without contextualizing history.
They'll follow if they get overrun by donkey chariots Hyksos style.
I'm not making baseless assumptions, I'm placing donkeys in an ancient middle eastern military context. In the middle east, chariotry in a military context came first, with cavalry(asinary?) directly evolving from it. Early cavalry organization had remnants of chariotry organization, for example with Assyrian mounted archers working in teams where one held the reins of both horses while the other shot, and may have derived from chariot crews riding their horses directly while on bad ground that wheeled vehicles couldn't cover.

The sequence of events for the adoption of donkeys as cavalry mounts, as I see it, goes as follows:
East Africans domesticate donkeys and Sumerians use onagers as chariot animals as OTL.
Sumerians acquire donkeys by trade, and realize their potential usefulness as chariot pullers.
Sumerian war donkeys quickly supplant Onagers due to being easier to train.
Use of donkeys encourages development of chariots as archery platforms and battle taxis rather than as shock weapons, since donkeys have a stronger sense of self preservation than horses.
Donkeys are bred for size and strength to pull larger chariots.
Chariot crews fighting on rough ground improvise and start directly riding their mega-donkeys, perhaps inspired by seeing children do the same with other beasts of burden.
Chariots gradually fall out of use as it is realized Asinary are more efficient.
Ta da, Donkey cavalry in a logical cultural and military context.
 
Alright, I tried to go out and do some research on the traits of Riding Donkeys (Mammoth Jacks and other breeds big enough for an adult to ride) versus the traits of horses:

-Donkeys have a plodding gait. In contrast, horses in the wild naturally gallop and can move swiftly without great effort. Modern donkeys bred for riding cannot gallop or jump over obstacles on command. They are just plain not physically capable of the speed and agility that horses have.

-However, donkeys have better endurance than horses.

-Donkeys are naturally calm animals and tend not to spook like horses do.

-Donkeys are desert animals and cannot handle the cold as well as horses. But, I have no idea what hundreds of years of breeding donkeys for cold-weather adaption could do.

-Donkey jacks (uncastrated males) are described as "unrideable." In contrast, stallions are perfectly rideable with good training and a good rider. Most warhorses used by knights were stallions.
 
Last edited:
Alright, I tried to go out and do some research on the traits of Riding Donkeys (Mammoth Jacks and other breeds big enough for an adult to ride) versus the traits of horses:

-Donkeys have a plodding gait. In contrast, horses in the wild naturally gallop and can move swiftly without great effort. Modern donkeys bred for riding cannot gallop or jump over obstacles on command. They are just plain not physically capable of the speed and agility that horses have.

-However, donkeys have better endurance than horses.

-Donkeys are naturally calm animals and tend not to spook like horses do.

-Donkeys are desert animals and cannot handle the cold as well as horses. But, I have no idea what hundreds of years of breeding donkeys for cold-weather adaption could do.

-Donkey jacks (uncastrated males) are described as "unrideable." In contrast, stallions are perfectly rideable with good training and a good rider. Most warhorses used by knights were stallions.
So Donkeys would make for decent mounts for mounted infantry and chariots, but would be of questionable utility as proper cavalry. Good to know.
 
Alright, I tried to go out and do some research on the traits of Riding Donkeys (Mammoth Jacks and other breeds big enough for an adult to ride) versus the traits of horses:

-Donkeys have a plodding gait. In contrast, horses in the wild naturally gallop and can move swiftly without great effort. Modern donkeys bred for riding cannot gallop or jump over obstacles on command. They are just plain not physically capable of the speed and agility that horses have.

-However, donkeys have better endurance than horses.

-Donkeys are naturally calm animals and tend not to spook like horses do.

-Donkeys are desert animals and cannot handle the cold as well as horses. But, I have no idea what hundreds of years of breeding donkeys for cold-weather adaption could do.

-Donkey jacks (uncastrated males) are described as "unrideable." In contrast, stallions are perfectly rideable with good training and a good rider. Most warhorses used by knights were stallions.
You can do a lot with selective breeding, cold weather tolerance, speed and agility are all included in that. the perfect example of this is dogs, for instance greyhounds are full 10km/h faster than wolves
 
Last edited:
You can do a lot with selective breeding, cold weather tolerance, speed and agility are all included in that. the perfect example of this is dogs, for instance greyhounds are full 10km/h faster than wolves

True, but it's still a long way from the horse, which is naturally a very fast, agile animal. Dogs have been domesticated some 20,000-40,000 years ago, we've had a long time to modify them.

As far as chariots go, I think you could get a team of donkeys up to a nice solid trot, but you're not going to be racing a breakneck speed at anything. I'm thinking riding donkeys could be good for heavy chariots and massed cavalry, but you're not going to be doing any lightning hit and run raids with them.
 
True, but it's still a long way from the horse, which is naturally a very fast, agile animal. Dogs have been domesticated some 20,000-40,000 years ago, we've had a long time to modify them.

As far as chariots go, I think you could get a team of donkeys up to a nice solid trot, but you're not going to be racing a breakneck speed at anything. I'm thinking riding donkeys could be good for heavy chariots and massed cavalry, but you're not going to be doing any lightning hit and run raids with them.
I can create a new dog breed within my own life time had I the desire to do it of course this isn't possible with donkeys as they do not have the same reproductive capacity but my point is the limitation donkeys have otl may not plague them atl because without horses there is a reason to put the effort into doing it.
Even their behaviour can be molded to an extent.
 
Last edited:
I can create a new dog breed within my own life time had I the desire to do it of course this isn't possible with donkeys as they do not have the same reproductive capacity but my point is the limitation donkeys have otl may not plague them otl because without horses there is a reason to put the effort into doing it.
Even their behaviour can be molded to an extent.

Dedicated hobbyists have been breeding donkeys for riding for decades (at the least) and that's what they've come up with.
 
This is an intriguing discussion about donkeys and onagers, and it´s become especially valuable with the added input of chariotry / asinary speculations.
Here are my two cents:
I think donkeys COULD potentially be selectively bred for greater speed, we cannot absolutely exclude that, but I doubt that they WOULD. The two big differences between our world and the no-horse world are in 1) what the animals` natural behavior inspires humans to do and 2) which environments they come from.
As for 1), the horses` natural speed as compared to the donkeys` natural persistence had a lot to do with why humans invented horse-based warfare and not donkey-based warfare, even though OTL`s Ancient Middle East had a lot of wars throughout millennia in which they had donkeys and onagers but not yet horses (3th and early 2nd millennium BCE). Horses entered the military world of the Fertile Crescent and Egypt around the middle of the 2nd millennium BCE, primarily in the form of chariot-using Hittites and Hyksos. (Chariot warfare had probably been used farther North for several centuries, while nothing comparable evolved in the Fertile Crescent.) All the speculations about war donkeys ought to take this into account.
Also 2), horses as mounts as well as as chariot-pulling animals developed on the Eurasian steppe, where the vast spaces which herders had to cover inspired mobility-oriented solutions. In Mesopotamia, Egypt and the like, people would look in animals for solutions to ease their hard labour. They did so throughout the 4th and 3rd millennia BCE. I don`t yet see why this would change in TTL´s 2nd millennium BCE, in the absence of charioteer arrivals.

Therefore, I would think
They'll follow if they get overrun by donkey chariots Hyksos style.
The sequence of events for the adoption of donkeys as cavalry mounts, as I see it, goes as follows:
East Africans domesticate donkeys and Sumerians use onagers as chariot animals as OTL.
Sumerians acquire donkeys by trade, and realize their potential usefulness as chariot pullers.
Sumerian war donkeys quickly supplant Onagers due to being easier to train.
Use of donkeys encourages development of chariots as archery platforms and battle taxis rather than as shock weapons, since donkeys have a stronger sense of self preservation than horses.
Donkeys are bred for size and strength to pull larger chariots.
Chariot crews fighting on rough ground improvise and start directly riding their mega-donkeys, perhaps inspired by seeing children do the same with other beasts of burden.
Chariots gradually fall out of use as it is realized Asinary are more efficient.
Ta da, Donkey cavalry in a logical cultural and military context.
Who would come to overrun anyone with donkey chariots Hyksos style? I think it would be biologically perfectly possible, but is it also historically likely to occur at all?
My alternate sequence of events would be as follows:
East Africans domesticate donkeys and Sumerians use onagers as chariot animals as OTL.
Egyptians use donkeys as chariot animals as OTL.
Stronger (but not faster) donkeys are bred under these circumstances.
Donkeys spread Eastwards across the Levante as OTL.
In warfare, stronger donkeys are used, like oxen, to pull wagons with equipment, foodstuff etc., and maybe to pull chariots in which high-ranking commanders are comfortably carried to the battlefield site instead of having to walk like Jack Infanterist.
Donkeys spread farther into Europe, where they are bred to support colder climate, and into Western Eurasia, where they are competing with the Bactrian Camel as beasts of burden, though.
On the steppe, they are more frequently used as mounts, including in military contexts, but not for speedy hit-and-run and shock tactics, and instead maybe, in addition to cart-pulling, also for the elevated position riders have. Here - if anywhere - more speedy donkeys would be of great use, and if it all, they`d be bred for this purpose here. In all likelihood, beginning no earlier than the 1st millennium BCE, though.
 
This is an intriguing discussion about donkeys and onagers, and it´s become especially valuable with the added input of chariotry / asinary speculations.
Here are my two cents:
I think donkeys COULD potentially be selectively bred for greater speed, we cannot absolutely exclude that, but I doubt that they WOULD. The two big differences between our world and the no-horse world are in 1) what the animals` natural behavior inspires humans to do and 2) which environments they come from.
As for 1), the horses` natural speed as compared to the donkeys` natural persistence had a lot to do with why humans invented horse-based warfare and not donkey-based warfare, even though OTL`s Ancient Middle East had a lot of wars throughout millennia in which they had donkeys and onagers but not yet horses (3th and early 2nd millennium BCE). Horses entered the military world of the Fertile Crescent and Egypt around the middle of the 2nd millennium BCE, primarily in the form of chariot-using Hittites and Hyksos. (Chariot warfare had probably been used farther North for several centuries, while nothing comparable evolved in the Fertile Crescent.) All the speculations about war donkeys ought to take this into account.
Also 2), horses as mounts as well as as chariot-pulling animals developed on the Eurasian steppe, where the vast spaces which herders had to cover inspired mobility-oriented solutions. In Mesopotamia, Egypt and the like, people would look in animals for solutions to ease their hard labour. They did so throughout the 4th and 3rd millennia BCE. I don`t yet see why this would change in TTL´s 2nd millennium BCE, in the absence of charioteer arrivals.

Therefore, I would think

Who would come to overrun anyone with donkey chariots Hyksos style? I think it would be biologically perfectly possible, but is it also historically likely to occur at all?
My alternate sequence of events would be as follows:
East Africans domesticate donkeys and Sumerians use onagers as chariot animals as OTL.
Egyptians use donkeys as chariot animals as OTL.
Stronger (but not faster) donkeys are bred under these circumstances.
Donkeys spread Eastwards across the Levante as OTL.
In warfare, stronger donkeys are used, like oxen, to pull wagons with equipment, foodstuff etc., and maybe to pull chariots in which high-ranking commanders are comfortably carried to the battlefield site instead of having to walk like Jack Infanterist.
Donkeys spread farther into Europe, where they are bred to support colder climate, and into Western Eurasia, where they are competing with the Bactrian Camel as beasts of burden, though.
On the steppe, they are more frequently used as mounts, including in military contexts, but not for speedy hit-and-run and shock tactics, and instead maybe, in addition to cart-pulling, also for the elevated position riders have. Here - if anywhere - more speedy donkeys would be of great use, and if it all, they`d be bred for this purpose here. In all likelihood, beginning no earlier than the 1st millennium BCE, though.

The Hyksos comment was mostly hyperbole, but the Asinary would be quite useful(probably more at the strategic level than at the tactical level) and would spread fast once adopted. I do agree with you that Asinary/Donkey chariots would be more useful as mounted infantry than as conventional shock cavalry or horse archers, and that mounted troops would never develop the overwhelming importance that they did OTL. As raiders, I think they would still be useful-on the strategic level, they just need to be able to march faster than footmen to be useful. They also wouldn't consume as much fodder as horses, which would be a nice bonus. Getting enough horsefeed-or conversely, horses overeating-could be a serious problem for cavalry.
 
The Hyksos comment was mostly hyperbole, but the Asinary would be quite useful(probably more at the strategic level than at the tactical level) and would spread fast once adopted. I do agree with you that Asinary/Donkey chariots would be more useful as mounted infantry than as conventional shock cavalry or horse archers, and that mounted troops would never develop the overwhelming importance that they did OTL. As raiders, I think they would still be useful-on the strategic level, they just need to be able to march faster than footmen to be useful. They also wouldn't consume as much fodder as horses, which would be a nice bonus. Getting enough horsefeed-or conversely, horses overeating-could be a serious problem for cavalry.
OK, so we`re talking about the development of donkey-mounted infantry as a limited military component developing primarily in the Eurasian steppes of the 1st millennium BCE and, from there, spreading to the rest of the donkey-compatible world. That would be at a time, though, in which the Old Civilizations from the Mediterranean to the Indus and the Yellow River will, in all likelihood, have already developed iron-working and have, thus, moved onto a somewhat faster technological development lane. With overland transport being still slower than OTL, discrepancies between Centre and Periphery will have grown to considerable extents by that time.
So probably no big advantage for the steppe people as their innovation would be quickly co-opted by (now really powerful) Empires and they themselves only be tied yet tigther into the latter.
 
Top