Re: War horses (was RE: How Mil Specs Live Forever)

[Lance Day <lday@access.digex.net>]

Poster: Lance Day <lday@access.digex.net>

> Alys wrote:
> >> Poster: petersr@spiegel.becltd.com (Peters, Rise J.)
> >> If two warhorse-butts could fit within a 4' 8 1/2 " space, those were pretty 
> >> slim-hipped warhorses.
> >
> >Horses were, on the whole, smaller back then.
> 
To which Corun replied:
> Milady,
> 
> I would beg of you tell us how you come by this assertion. In all honesty,
> it sounds much like the urban myth that people were also much smaller in
> period. There are many varieties of horse, and those chosen as war horses by
> the Europeans were, to the best of my knowledge, mostly draught horses of
> the Clydesdale, Percheron and Shire variety. These are the three largest
> breeds that I know of, ... 

[much deleted]

> I only write out of curiosity. Also to help dispel the myth, if myth it is
> indeed.

Your Excellency, there is a plain and simple answer to this conundrum.
(Or would it be a Corundrum? :) 

The above mentioned reference to horses being smaller is indeed myth.
..and utter balderdash at that.

You see, the Real Truth is that while horses were the same size then as
now, it was peoples FEET that were larger. 

So, a distance of 4 feet was actually much longer then than it is now.
The same goes for the additional 8.5 inches... (or so we say)

(Ok, so two myth-takes do not a wryhta make...)

-Uryene
=======================================================================
List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
            Submissions:  atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
        Admin. requests:  majordomo@atlantia.sca.org