|
Post by fth on Oct 30, 2007 18:03:06 GMT 1
another point re the origin of shoes and shoeing -- it is thought by several hostorians that this coincided with horses being kept IN - ie standing in stables, where the feet are softer than if they are out on the hills and then brought in to ride...
|
|
|
Post by fin on Oct 30, 2007 19:30:19 GMT 1
Yes, but I've always thought they were mostly wrong on that one. There ARE what appear to be Bronze Age stables--we have a friend who was excavating a block in Israel last year--but shoeing is practically unknown in the Bronze Age, even though the horse was domesticated by then. Xenophon talks about using riverstone in stalls and yards, to keep the stabled horse's feet conditioned, so at least *some* people had figured that you need to keep the horse on the surface you want to ride it on. Was it Jaime Jackson who had the daft idea that horses were shod during the Crusades because their feet disintegrated because they supposedly were kept in un-mucked out stalls during lengthy sieges?
|
|
|
Post by fth on Oct 30, 2007 23:08:36 GMT 1
well if your sable has stone floors -- no shoes needed -- I do not htink Jamie's idea is so strange as the romans used more shoes on horses in countries where the horses were kept stabled on soft beds
so I think shoes developed ot cope with unconditioned hooves -- and a contributor to that lack of conditioning was how the horses were kept
|
|
|
Post by fin on Oct 30, 2007 23:44:47 GMT 1
Of course. Conditioning does come into it, and a horse on a soft surface who can't move freely, especially if he's fed a grain based diet, is going to degenerate in the hoof department. However, most pre-modern horses had to work for a living, so I very much doubt that they were stabled 24/7--they were in hard work, so lack of stimulation on the feet, and hence conditioning, may not have been a major factor. I mean, to take the Romans as an example--there is more evidence for shoeing (though not very much) in the Northern parts of the Empire. I've only glanced through the records for Pompeii and Herculaneum, but I don't recall there being any evidence of a farriery at either place. But there are records of farriers accompanying the auxilliary cavalry units and I *think* some evidence for Roman horseshoes in Britain. The difference may not be in the stabling--it's pretty difficult to keep your horses stabled when you're an invasion force doing 30 miles a day--but the vegetation. It's pretty easy to keep a horse sound in the dry arid Med--rather more difficult in the wet and grassy Northern Europe. All the same, it isn't really until after the Crusades that it became normal to shoe horses in Britain--by then horses were being bred bigger (Henry VIII ordered the slaughter of any stallion under 15hh), with perhaps less regard for feet, and it's entirely probable that they were confined too. My objection to the stabled-during-Crusades argument though was that maybe whoever thought of it should have found out a bit more about the length of sieges, the stabling arrangements, and should have avoided the Hollywood-ish assumption that medieval people were utterly filthy savages who didn't have the sense to muck a stable out. I can think of a lot more sensible reasons for shoeing a horse that had to travel long distances, with a heavy load, over difficult terrain, and who was trained to kick the sh!t out of an enemy
|
|
|
Post by amelia on Oct 31, 2007 13:07:46 GMT 1
My saddler came yesterday to alter my WOW and she couldn't believe how good sunny's feet looked - she said how neat and correct they are. I never ever had any comments about them when i had my farrier trim them.
|
|
|
Post by Yann on Oct 31, 2007 13:31:08 GMT 1
The daft thing is how little extra time and effort it takes to turn OK into fabulous on the hoof stand...
|
|
|
Post by fin on Oct 31, 2007 13:56:16 GMT 1
Assuming you can get the bl00dy horse ON the hoof stand, obviously
|
|
|
Post by rj on Oct 31, 2007 14:48:50 GMT 1
Has anyone invited janetgeorge to spend a day with a top EP? It's obvious jg is very caring knowledgeable experienced horseperson, but not convinced about the benefits of barefoot for 99% of the equine population (given the right conditions and a following wind). I still reckon horseshoes were considered to be so revolutionary at the time, and there was absolutely no consideration of whether they were in the horses best interests. The horses had to be able to cover certain distances over different terrain, and shoes meant they could do so without stopping for maintenance. Yes of course they continued to use them - because they could! But, if some of you remember the wonderful material nylon. Every man was wearing nylon shirts pants & socks, because they were marketed as labour saving, drip-dry etc. Had the men not complained they'd still be forced to wear them now. Horses couldn't complain!
|
|
|
Post by Susan on Oct 31, 2007 21:50:58 GMT 1
rj I love your posts..you do make me smile..
JanetGeorge..if you were given the opportunity to meet face to face with one would you?
I know a friend who is a farrier felt there was no need for him to learn about BF trimming as he knew what there was to know and said yes horses in ideal world can go unshod but for most no. No reason for him to waste his time. We got him the chance to meet and watch and talk to KC le Pierre.. he then read his book the Chosen Road, named because it was a road KC chose to take Within a few hours my friend had not only changed his opinion but booked into the next training course.He is now one of the highly trained DAEP's and will also be doing owners clinics.
This is isn't about making anyone change what they do, but to have a more informed base. We often think we have all the answers and think what we have is the best, till we experience other options. It is also a changing world of information and research of the unshod horse, as KC continues to strive to find out about. That he passes on.
We also can believe it isn't broken so we do not need to mend it. Then we find out it wasn't as we thought.
|
|
|
Post by fin on Oct 31, 2007 22:57:41 GMT 1
I still reckon horseshoes were considered to be so revolutionary at the time, and there was absolutely no consideration of whether they were in the horses best interests. The horses had to be able to cover certain distances over different terrain, and shoes meant they could do so without stopping for maintenance. Yes of course they continued to use them - because they could! If you look at the expense and difficulty of obtaining and working iron though, from the early Age to the Middle Ages even, we can figure out a few things. Primarily, it was an expensive business. Shoes tend to have been re-used and the iron recycled as much as possible, which means we have very few early shoes left really and hence no accurate way of ascertaining the numbers of horses who were shod. Plus, a lot of shoes that are found were lost, and hence pretty much out of context--they turn up in fields occasionally, rather than in identifiable and recordable sites. So it's hard to place any shoe-artefact within the historical record. I suspect though, given the expense of iron in the early days, that probably quite a few horsemen would have had the same sort of discussion we're having now..... And I'd bet my last dollar that a load of folks went 'What? Pay 40 blue beads and a pint of milk for a set of bl00dy newfangled shoes? What sort of daylight robbery is that when I can just boot the ned out onto some rubbish rocky pasture and he'll trim his own ruddy feet and harden them up for free. Pah! You lot were born yesterday, you were!'
|
|
|
Post by LisaM on Oct 31, 2007 23:39:31 GMT 1
EP - equine prodiatrist (sp) My BF trimmer charges between £38 and £42 per trim depending how many she does in my area on that day - Vi has her feet trimmed every 6 weeks and I feel that the time my trimmer spends talking, educating and quietly trimming my horse is worth the money - Farriers tend to treat trims like it's 'half a job' and therefore the simply perform 'half a job'... IMO farriers were trained to apply shoes and to trim feet to accommodate this. Whereas trimmers are simply that - this is their 'whole' job and they put everything into it.
|
|
|
Post by janetgeorge on Nov 1, 2007 0:31:37 GMT 1
JanetGeorge..if you were given the opportunity to meet face to face with one would you? Heavens no - I'd run a mile! ;D Not mine! Today it was ONLY trims - and he gave his usual EXCELLENT care and attention to the 3 year old, and 3 two year olds (despite bloody Rambo deciding to be a sod - and Lofty deciding it was a nice day to lie down on a farrier! ) Rambo has a front foot that tends to turn in a little - so he was out on the concrete for a good look at progress and to see him walk before he started. The others are straight forward - Andrew has trimmed them all their lives and they have excellent feet - but I would challenge ANY EP to do a better job, or to be more patient and careful with a 16.2 hh, 2 year old colt who is going through a periodic touch of the Kevins!
|
|
|
Post by fin on Nov 1, 2007 0:45:15 GMT 1
Ah, you'd like mine He's a good trimmer and he's VERY good at Kevins. I have two--one with a kill switch (he hates farriers of any denomination--he's gone off my son since poor Rohan started trimming him, too ), and one short but determined Welshie who's only two but already knows every trick in the book, which she's intending to rewrite after a bit more research into 101 Ways To Boot Your Hoofcare Professional Up The Ars and Get Away With It. My son actually WANTS to be a trimmer. Mad. Quite, quite mad
|
|
Azrael
Grand Prix Poster
Posts: 2,733
|
Post by Azrael on Nov 1, 2007 11:40:22 GMT 1
When H finishes her book Mia would like a copy please ;D I think she misses having an EP to terrorise and pedicures from meanmummy are just not as much fun so she'd love a whole book full of new tricks
|
|
|
Post by Lulu on Nov 1, 2007 12:53:15 GMT 1
I know a friend who is a farrier felt there was no need for him to learn about BF trimming as he knew what there was to know and said yes horses in ideal world can go unshod but for most no. No reason for him to waste his time. We got him the chance to meet and watch and talk to KC le Pierre.. he then read his book the Chosen Road, named because it was a road KC chose to take Within a few hours my friend had not only changed his opinion but booked into the next training course.He is now one of the highly trained DAEP's and will also be doing owners clinics. OOOh please let me know about the owner clinics, are they near to Norfolk ?? I'd be very interested to go on a course
|
|