The Horse Flu of 546

[MerryPrankster]

About what percentage of horses have died?

The horse nomads are pretty much extinct it looks like, but the Persian king still had his cavalry, as did some of the Germans.

How about agriculture? Were horses used as draft animals at this point? There might well be famine if it's more difficult to plow.

 

[carlton_bach]

About what percentage of horses have died?

The horse nomads are pretty much extinct it looks like, but the Persian king still had his cavalry, as did some of the Germans.

About 95% mortality overall, with more in the heart of the outbreak. The steppe nomads are finished because their economy and system of production collapsed. There are foot pastoralists, hunter-gatherers, traders and the occasional group still holding on to enough horses to eke out bare survival, but the steppe culture is dead. Some horses are still around, but only a centralised command structure in a society that doesn't require them can still manage to concentrate them in any but token numbers. In fact, everybody still has cavalry, but the number supportable is minimal - doubly so since any gathering of horses from different places risks spreading the infection. In the long run, cavalry will become a defensive arm, an edge to the lucky defender who has a few horses in places, because nobody dares assemble cavalry forces any more.

Mortality is high, but not quite as severe, in mules and donkeys.

How about agriculture? Were horses used as draft animals at this point? There might well be famine if it's more difficult to plow.

Not yet. The primary draft animal is still the ox, with the donkey second in the Mideast. Draft horses don't come into their own until a few centuries later - except, of course, they won't here.

 

[MerryPrankster]

Ah.

Given the nomadic confederacies and empires are crumbling, is the future uber-Rome and uber-China?

(and perhaps uber-India while we're at it?)

 

[carlton_bach]

Ah.

Given the nomadic confederacies and empires are crumbling, is the future uber-Rome and uber-China?

(and perhaps uber-India while we're at it?)

The sixth and seventh centuries still suck majorly for any kind of civilised endeavours, so not really. But settled civilisations will have a much easier time of it without forever having to look over their shoulders for the schoolyard bully du jour and his ten thousand horseman friends. Rome is going to keep dominating Europe, Malwa is set to be the main player in northern India for a while, and China is - China. And I think I'll fuck over Japan again, just because I can.

 

[Kaptin Kurk]

So, wait, Camels are effected too?

Also, I wonder if it will effect the use of War Dogs? I'm not sure it makes sense, but I could see how they might be an interesting alternative for shock effect.

 

[carlton_bach]

So, wait, Camels are effected too?

Also, I wonder if it will effect the use of War Dogs? I'm not sure it makes sense, but I could see how they might be an interesting alternative for shock effect.

No, camels and dromedaries are fine. Horses are worst affected, the disease also affects donkeys, mules and zebras, but it is not as contagious or virulent in their populations. That's it.

 

[Valdemar II]

No, camels and dromedaries are fine. Horses are worst affected, the disease also affects donkeys, mules and zebras, but it is not as contagious or virulent in their populations. That's it.

If Camels are fine, the Nomads could survive by swicthing to them (though a lot of them already use them). But they would be a lot less dangerous on camels than on horses.

 

[carlton_bach]

If Camels are fine, the Nomads could survive by swicthing to them (though a lot of them already use them). But they would be a lot less dangerous on camels than on horses.

You can't ride herd on Bactrian camels, they're strong but slow and too smart to be any good as war mounts. DRomedaries would work, but they don't react well to wet cold and snow, I'm told. That means the steppe as an economic resource has just been rendered dramatically less useful, because extensive pastoralism there depends on a large number of horses available.

I do envision the Central Asian plains eventually settled by a combination of transhumant pastoralists, irrigated agriculture in more fertile pockets, and hunter-gatherer societies in the less habitable parts. A good deal of the nomad population even survived. But their societies are destroyed, survivors can only try to rebuild them until the next horse flu sweep and in the end, the proud horsemen will be linguistic and cultural pockets in the suburbs of agricultural states. Much like Native Americans or Aborigines today, except nobody romanticises them.

 

[Cromm Crúaich]

I'm interested about the status of wardogs too. If they become useful, the vikings might spread irish wolfhounds into russia from dublin and other trading posts [...if they still establish them, that is].

 

[Scurck]

I wonder if you couldn't bred a race a war cattle....
Not fast, but the shock potential is huge...

I did not get the first part.

Moose have better stamina then horses, can handle tougher terrain and require less food. In the 1600's Sweden tried to tame moose and succeeded fairly well, but the program was disbanded when they couldn’t get the moose to quit running away from cannon fire.
But a couple of hundred years of breeding would fix that...

 

[Kaptin Kurk]

I did not get the first part.

Moose have better stamina then horses, can handle tougher terrain and require less food. In the 1600's Sweden tried to tame moose and succeeded fairly well, but the program was disbanded when they couldn’t get the moose to quit running away from cannon fire.
But a couple of hundred years of breeding would fix that...

Heh. I said ferocious war cattle! Besides, the Europeans wouldn't mind drinking the milk of their war cattle, so...

Well, I guess it'd take generations of breeding to keep the cattle from running away from battle as well, so oh well, no war cattle either.

I wonder, with no or little cavalry to act as scouts, it seems like certain basics of warefare are going to be changed dramatically. Wouldn't armies of size or spread out be that much more difficult to control, leading to communications delays f-ups? Communication between distant parts of an empire (unless connect by water) that much slower? Infantry that much more suseptible to ambush, with no ability to send out cavalry screens, crushing defeats that much less likely with no cavalry to persue those fleeing the field and strike a killing blow from behind. (Shed a couple of pieces of armor, and a lot of skedattling men will survive to fight another day - assuming they can get equipment - who'd otherwise have been run down by horesmen. Well, maybe armies will develop a class of real light infantry to play that role of fleeing-man-killer. Still, they won't be as effective.)

 

[pieman3141]

The problem with reindeer, elephants, and other crazy animals is that they're undomesticable. They can be trained, but not domesticated. In fact, the animals that have been domesticated up until now are most likely the only ones that are domesticable.

The closest thing to a horse in many parts of the world would be the donkey. Camels are next, followed by the ever-so-slight chance of the llama (ha!).

 

[Admiral Matt]

The problem with reindeer, elephants, and other crazy animals is that they're undomesticable. They can be trained, but not domesticated. In fact, the animals that have been domesticated up until now are most likely the only ones that are domesticable.

The closest thing to a horse in many parts of the world would be the donkey. Camels are next, followed by the ever-so-slight chance of the llama (ha!).

You are wrong. Domesticability is not some lucky feature that shows up in a random assortment of species. It is a discrete set of genetic tendencies that shows up in identical form in dramatically different animals. Most mammals (and many other animals) appear to be domesticable if a serious effort is made on a large enough timescale. It is true that African animals, having evolved side-by-side with early hominids, are less domesticable than most. But that is about it.

By way of example, the Russians successfully domesticated foxes during the Soviet period. The results have the same traits that appear in most domesticated mammals - monochromatic coloration, holstein-like pigmentation, curled tails, and most importantly, infantile characteristics. In mammals the process of domestication - which amounts to selecting a population for lack of aggression - results in adult animals that look and act like scaled up versions of their young. Shortened faces, greater tendency to play, trust toward strangers.... all of it. These features appear in dogs and pigs, horses and cats, cattle and foxes; and in none of their wild relatives.

It ought to be mentioned that in the wild adult wolves don't bark, whine, or wag their tails. But domesticate them (or foxes, for that matter) and suddenly all the behaviors are there.

 

[Sovereign12]

Since the canine family was brought up. I could possibly see one of the northern cultures, probably in Scandinavia (Sami'), getting the idea to hitch their dogs to a sled. From this point someone in a neighboring latitude may come up with the idea of reinventing the chariot.

Some nordic or uralic charioteers and there war dogs come from the north attacking the more "civilized" peoples of the south.

Once one group sees this, they being to breed their own dogs to be better pullers of chariots in the warmer climates.

Dogs would be good for this since many breeds with not run in combat, after training, and could be bred large enough for two to pull a two man chariot. While not a huge number could be maintained, since its easier to find food for a herbivore rather than a carnivore, these dog-chariots might be considered the top warriors of their peoples.

 

[Kaptin Kurk]

Since the canine family was brought up. I could possibly see one of the northern cultures, probably in Scandinavia (Sami'), getting the idea to hitch their dogs to a sled. From this point someone in a neighboring latitude may come up with the idea of reinventing the chariot.

Some nordic or uralic charioteers and there war dogs come from the north attacking the more "civilized" peoples of the south.

Once one group sees this, they being to breed their own dogs to be better pullers of chariots in the warmer climates.

Dogs would be good for this since many breeds with not run in combat, after training, and could be bred large enough for two to pull a two man chariot. While not a huge number could be maintained, since its easier to find food for a herbivore rather than a carnivore, these dog-chariots might be considered the top warriors of their peoples.

Dogs are actually omnivores. I don't know if they could subsist on a vegetables and grains alone any better than we can, but their diet definately doens't have to be all meat, which cheapens it.

 

[HueyLong]

Dogs cannot attain the size or build necessary for pulling wheeled vehicles. Our bigger breeds have a number of health problems without being put under that strain.

 

[Sovereign12]

Dogs are actually omnivores. I don't know if they could subsist on a vegetables and grains alone any better than we can, but their diet definately doens't have to be all meat, which cheapens it.

I know, but at the time these chariots may be developed I don't think the people would think to feed the dogs plant materials. While the dogs may eat vegetables and such on their own, the handlers would look for meat for them.

If we need an omnivore to pull the chariot, maybe these people should develop a warpig (warboar?).
Pigs are intelligent, and while not as useful as a horse or dog in combat, breeding those traits best suited for war would not be too difficult. While not often used as work animal, there is no reason they could not be bred to be so.

Say it starts with someone getting the idea to use pigs to help plow a plot of land. As this catches on, some people start to use the pigs to pull carts with produce and goods. Eventually pig pulled cart races become popular. Strong , faster, and controllable pigs are bred. Food is readily available and the pigs breed fairly quick compaired to cattle. The downside to using the pig is the number of diseases they harbor, their lack of sweat glands (while canines pant to keep cool, pigs need water or mud), and skin sensitivity to sunburn.

Dogs cannot attain the size or build necessary for pulling wheeled vehicles. Our bigger breeds have a number of health problems without being put under that strain.

But they could if bred properly.
Back when I was in high school we would have people come to demonstrate cart racing with various animals pulling (I went to a Vocational Agriculture school BTW). One of the races had some people with large dogs.

While this isn't the group I saw back in school, it is a real sport.
http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/rottweilerdriver/DogCarting/index.html

And from wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carting