The Horse Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Appaloosa the Nez Perce and racist history.

15K views 70 replies 23 participants last post by  Smokum 
#1 ·
Been doing some digging, looking at pictures and just thinking. I am also in contact with the Nez Perce tribe, waiting on some info.

My theory, The Spanish/European being sole or original source of horses to the US is wrong.
The Nez Perce and probably others had horses before the Spanish showed up.
The escaped spanish horses populating the west is wrong.
The tribal horse cultures of the west originating solely from escaped Spanish stock is wrong.

Historical tidbits to back this up.
History books are notoriously racist and nationalistic. Lots of what we learned in US schools is total BS and leaves out alot. As well as a tendency for everything to be attributed to white people and Americans.
Columbus "discovered" America, a land occupied by millions,
Americans defeating the Nazis,,, yeh migh wanna look at Russian history, and on and on,,,
More and more Asian and African precolumbian contact seeing the light of day. Seems Egyptian pharohs liked their smoke and blow, Chinese artifacts in CA,,,, and frikking Pueblo's that speak a dialect of Japaneses.

Ok someone look at old school Appaloosas and Nez perce photos or drawings, Now look at a picture of Spanish horses, and a picture of central asian horses. Doesnt take a rocket scientist to see where those horses came from. Even today when the Nez perce have tried to restablish their breeds based on old photos and descriptions as well as some head of supposedly maintained stock. They went to Afganistan for breed stock NOT Europe of to other US breeds. Look at old Han dynasty chinese paintings of their horses, now look at an old stock appaloosa.

The Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Polynesians, believe it or not all had the ability to make ships and boats. But we are to assume only white people crossed an ocean ? Especially ones with currents that would make it even easier to hit the Pacific Northwest than for Europeans to hit the Northeast.

SO by 1804 Lewis in Clark found a tribe that was already famous for horse breeding and had even developed their own trademark breed, yet we are to believe this was a result of enough horses getting loose in mexico starting in the 1500's walking through thousands of miles of country inhabited by tribes whos first inclination when seeing horses was to eat them. Seriously horses woulda been mega hard to get to the Americas, You honestly think people would just turn em loose willy nilly ? Then they travel through mountains outside natural migration routes, and stumbling upon a tribe of people with little recorded european contact prior to 1804, SO all that was gonna happen in less than 250 years ?
 
See less See more
#3 ·
Your "theory" has been put forth by hundreds of people over the years, and has always been disproved. The problem with the indigenous theory is that the indigenous horses in North America became extinct 10,000 years ago, and absolutely no fossil evidence of them during that time frame has been found - despite finding tons of horse fossils prior to that time. Now unless a medicine man conjured up at least one male and one female horse out of the air, horses could have come from only one source - the Spanish. There is absolutely no evidence - or even speculation that I am aware of - that Asians traveled to North America after the land bridge was gone. There is evidence that Polynisians traveled to South America, but they would not and could not have brought horses.

While the indigenous theory is attractive and romantic...it would be great if we could demonstrate that Appys came from a pocket of indigenous stock that was discovered and saved by the Indians, and we Appy people would lord it over everyone else if it were true, there is simply no evidence to support the theory. The bottom line is because there were no indigenous horses left for thousands of years, and because Appys were being raised before the first horses came to the East coast, there is only one possible source for their origin...
 
#4 · (Edited)
...There is absolutely no evidence - or even speculation that I am aware of - that Asians traveled to North America after the land bridge was gone...
I've seen speculation & there was a book written, but I believe the book has been debunked.

"In his book 1421: The Year China Discovered the World, the British author Gavin Menzies made the controversial claim that the fleet of Zheng He arrived in America in 1421. Menzies' contact hypothesis is regarded by professional historians as invented without proof."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Columbian_trans-oceanic_contact#Chinese

http://www.1421exposed.com/html/real_menzies_.html

"Columbus "discovered" America, a land occupied by millions,"

And no one, including Columbus, said the lands were unoccupied. Columbus discovered America in the sense that Europe (and the rest of the world) became aware of it. There were earlier European settlers even, but none who made all of Europe aware of America.

"Americans defeating the Nazis,,, yeh migh wanna look at Russian history"

Every history book I've seen DOES mention the Russians. It certainly isn't an obscure, overlooked tidbit of history.

" yet we are to believe this was a result of enough horses getting loose in mexico starting in the 1500's walking through thousands of miles of country inhabited by tribes whos first inclination when seeing horses was to eat them"


That could easily happen. It takes a species very little time to spread a thousand miles and more IF 1) the habitat is suitable, and B) the species is highly mobile. California & Oregon are wonderful habitat for horses, and horses are highly mobile animals. Consider the rabbit in Australia:
"The current infestation appears to have originated with the release of 12 wild rabbits by Thomas Austin on his property, Barwon Park, near Winchelsea, Victoria, in October 1859 for hunting purposes....Many other farms released their rabbits into the wild after Austin.

At the time he had stated, "The introduction of a few rabbits could do little harm and might provide a touch of home, in addition to a spot of hunting."

Rabbits are extremely prolific creatures, and spread rapidly across the southern parts of the country. Australia had ideal conditions for a rabbit population explosion. With mild winters, rabbits were able to breed the entire year. With widespread farming, areas that may have been scrub or woodlands were instead turned into vast areas with low vegetations, creating ideal habitats for rabbits.

In a classic example of unintended consequences, within ten years of their introduction in 1859, rabbits had become so prevalent that two million could be shot or trapped annually without having any noticeable effect on the population."
Rabbits in Australia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
#5 ·
lack of fossil evidence simple means a lack of evidence. Lack doenst disprove anything. I also didn't say indeginous, but that is a possibility. So while it is ok to admit Polynesians sailed into South America, it is far fetched for a Korean to do the same ? even though the distance was much less and the currents pushing in that direction ? It is also untrue to say there is no evidence of Asian contact. As you mentioned Polynesians in South America, Zuni pueblo Indians speaking a dialect unlike anything else in North America yet as close to Japaneses as Spanish is to Italian ?
Sorry but a lack of evidence to alternate possibilities doesnt prove all horses came from the spanish. Scroll up and look at that picture of the Idaho Appaloosa, then google some Chinese and central Asian horses pictures. The truth is right there in front of us.
In order for herds of horses to reach idaho they would have had to cross habitat that wasnt suitable for them. In large enough numbers for a entire culture to spring up and create a breeding program and a distinct breed in a very short time that just happens to resemble central asian horses instead of the parent Spanish horses ? Seems pretty far fetched to me.
 
#6 ·
There was nothing unsuitable about the habitat of the Central Valley of California & Oregon.

It is also impossible to prove a negative, but the absence of evidence doesn't qualify as affirmative evidence. It isn't just fossils of horses, but evidence that horses were being used by the native Americans during the thousands of years prior to the Spanish. Tools, drawings, structures, oral tradition etc. Nada.
 
#7 ·
I think without solid physical evidence you can't really prove or disprove things that happened so long ago. Even with solid evidence after a point things are just an educated guess. Science is neat and all but it's a GUESS as to wether something happened 1 billion years ago or 1000 years ago.
Posted via Mobile Device
 
#8 ·
yeh now look at some pictures of chinese horse art. Quite often science theory is presented as fact, but later turns out to wrong. Been reading alot of history lately and am finding lots and lots of it is racially and nationally biased. It doesnt take to much digging to find plenty of examples.
 
#11 ·
Been reading alot of history lately and am finding lots and lots of it is racially and nationally biased.
Of course it is. It's based on the white man's perspective. We've found out that Columbus enslaved and committed genocide on the Native people. Granted, it's been a few years since I've cracked a history book, but that certainly wasn't in the ones that I read.

History glorified Custer when in fact he was another who wanted to wipe out the Native people. Again, according to the history books I read while in school, he was made out to be a hero.

As Darrin stated, those in charge write the history books and it's not always the full truth.
 
#9 ·
It isn't racist to note an absence of horses in America prior to 1492. There was also little or no use of wheels (Pre-columbian Wheeled Artifacts from Meso and South America) for transport - possibly because there weren't suitable draft animals.

The idea that the Nez Perce had horses from Asia while no one else noticed is a bit implausible.
 
#10 ·
Yes, those in charge write the history books so there is racism and nationalism in them. I also agree darn near every nation on earth at one point discovered America. But, scientist have found a huge, gaping hole in horse history in the US. That does seem to conclude horses had died out and been reintroduced around the time of the Spanish appearing. That does indicate that's where our current crop of horses came from. Lets also not forget that huge tracts of land were very suitable for horses too, the same land that millions of bison lived on.
 
#12 ·
and the pilgrims settled plymouth, because there was already a town there and the fields were cleared. Plague spread by earlier explorers had pretty much wiped out the eastern indians. So we are saying a gap in fossil data PROVES only the spanish could have brought horses ? Hog wash, Why couldnt the chinese have brought them to trade in the early 1400's ?

Ok the offical white man version,,, Spanish horses got loose, many of the indians wanted to eat them, about 1690 they reached the shoshone, who had no use for them because of the terrain. The Nez perce traded for a few cause they were intrigued , SO in barely 100 years, they developed a herd over 10,000. Many men had 50 or 60 each, They developed superior breeding, superior riding, superior gelding techniques, and a COMPLETELTY NEW BREED that just hapenned to nearly duplicate asian horses ? In 100 years without any outside influence until Lewis and Clark showed up in 1804 ?

Yeh and I got some ocean front property in Arizona I'll sell you cheap. I am really waiting to hear back from the Nez Perce Historians.
 
#13 ·
There was slavery and genocide in America before Columbus. And Spaniards accused Columbus of gross cruelty, and he was sent in chains back to Spain before the King of Spain released him.

Custer was a mixed bag. No rational person ever called him a coward, tho, and he fought and killed plenty of white guys in the Civil War. Unless you believed the movie "They Died with Their Boots On", there has been a TON of negative history written about Custer. By the time I started high school in the 70s, more folks attacked his reputation than revered it.

The Pilgrims did not move into an established town. Illness brought by visiting fishermen had killed out the town of 2000 Patuxet...almost 100% mortality. While that meant there weren't enough natives to overrun them, that doesn't mean they walked in and took over a town. In the first year, sickness killed half of the whites.

"Why couldnt the chinese have brought them to trade in the early 1400's ?"

I guess the big problem is that there is no record of any kind of horses in America before the Spanish. No paintings. No drawings. No toys. No words for horse. No oral tradition.

Nor is there any indication the Chinese were exploring America, let alone trading here. Nor the Koreans. Nor the Japanese. Either it was an enormous secret, concealed for all time, or it didn't happen.

Further, the theory requires the Nes Perce to have bred horses without any of their neighbors catching on to it.

It is kind of like the wheel. The concept wasn't entirely unknown prior to Columbus, but there is no evidence wheels were being used to transport anything anywhere in America.

Things just don't happen in a vacuum. If there had been horses, there would have been ripples in the historical pond - toys, drawings, words for horses, attempts to steal them...something.

If you want to hold to your theory, have a nut. If you want anyone to believe you, you'll need more than paintings of spotted horses in China...or of spotted horses in caves in France (around 18,000 years ago):

 
#14 ·
Well Joe, if some credible alternative with evidence appears I'll believe it. Until then I'll stick with the current theory. Chinese definately had a decent navy at one time and "could" of brought horses here. To my knowledge there are no chinese writings saying they did and we know they have a long written history. Maybe archivist just haven't dug out the right scrolls yet and if they do I'll believe it.

As for going to 10k horses in 100 years, not a problem and doesn't even take that long with a low death rate. Starting with 20 mares and doubling every year and you'll reach 10k horses in 10 years. Of course there will be deaths and they all wont be mares but still easily reached number in 20 years. As for their skills, that can spread fast also with just one person being taught by a knowledgeable person and teaching tribes full of interested braves.
 
#15 ·
Well Joe, if some credible alternative with evidence appears I'll believe it. Until then I'll stick with the current theory. Chinese definately had a decent navy at one time and "could" of brought horses here. To my knowledge there are no chinese writings saying they did and we know they have a long written history. Maybe archivist just haven't dug out the right scrolls yet and if they do I'll believe it.
Yeah, unlike the Indians, all Asians that had horses that I am aware of had a writen language in the time frame they had boats large enough to carry horses.

As to the racism issue, I got lost somewhere. What does that have to do with horses?
 
#17 ·
Joe without evidence your theory is just that a theory and nothing else.
The wild horse population doubles every four years. It is not too far fetched to see how the numbers increased in a 100 year period.
No one will probably have anything stronger than a guess to estimate when the Native Americans tribes got the horses.
Shalom
 
#20 ·
I worked in restoration for an historical library, mainly western Canada. Apparently when it was learned that the native people were susceptible to white man's diseases order were given to trade small pox infected blankets. That disease decimated the native population. I've often wondered if small pox would have lived on the blankets during a voyage. It would make more sense if sailor's unknowingly infected women who unknowingly spread it. We don't read of how many women these men raped. There's an island of the Japanese mainland,where the traditional costume is not like that of the mainland but similar to our west coast Salish. Has anyone done DNA to see if the early Salish were actually Japanese. The North American coastline the continental shelf was once above water so travelling between continents and moving along the coasts wasn't any where as difficult as if tried today in the same manner as when NA was first settled.
 
#29 ·
They've pretty well proved the Japanese were in SA via DNA analysis of some mummies down there. There's a recessive gene only found in the Japanese gene pool and in these SA mummies. Can't be to far of a stretch to say they were also in NA.

The problem with horses being brought over is logistics. The voyage is a long one, if it goes to long horses become food. They drink a lot of water every day which is a precious resource at sea. They eat a lot of food and storage is at a premium. It takes a decent sized ship to transport even a single horse with food.

A lot of the people who came here did it in small craft, were fisherman and island hoped over here. Not exactly optimal conditions for hauling a horse across the pacific.
 
#21 ·
Actually, the only case I know of where distributing blankets with smallpox was discussed was during the French-Indian War as part of Pontiac's Rebellion.

From Wiki:
"The war began in May 1763 when Native Americans, offended by the policies of British General Jeffrey Amherst, attacked a number of British forts and settlements. Eight forts were destroyed, and hundreds of colonists were killed or captured, with many more fleeing the region. Hostilities came to an end after British Army expeditions in 1764 led to peace negotiations over the next two years. Native Americans were unable to drive away the British, but the uprising prompted the British government to modify the policies that had provoked the conflict.

Warfare on the North American frontier was brutal, and the killing of prisoners, the targeting of civilians, and other atrocities were widespread. In what is now perhaps the best-known incident of the war, British officers at Fort Pitt attempted to infect the besieging Native Americans with smallpox using blankets that had been exposed to the virus...

...Colonists in western Pennsylvania fled to the safety of Fort Pitt after the outbreak of the war. Nearly 550 people crowded inside, including more than 200 women and children. Simeon Ecuyer, the Swiss-born British officer in command, wrote that "We are so crowded in the fort that I fear disease…; the smallpox is among us." Fort Pitt was attacked on June 22, 1763, primarily by Delawares. Too strong to be taken by force, the fort was kept under siege throughout July. Meanwhile, Delaware and Shawnee war parties raided deep into Pennsylvania, taking captives and killing unknown numbers of settlers in scattered farms...

...Bouquet agreed, replying to Amherst on July 13: "I will try to inoculate the *******s with some blankets that may fall into their hands, and take care not to get the disease myself." Amherst responded on July 16: "You will do well to inoculate the Indians by means of blankets, as well as every other method that can serve to extirpate this execrable race."

Officers at the besieged Fort Pitt had already attempted to do what Amherst and Bouquet were discussing, apparently on their own initiative. During a parley at Fort Pitt on June 24, 1763, Ecuyer gave Delaware representatives two blankets and a handkerchief that had been exposed to smallpox, hoping to spread the disease to the Native Americans in order to end the siege. William Trent, the militia commander, left records that showed the purpose of giving the blankets was "to Convey the Smallpox to the Indians."

It is uncertain whether this fully documented attempt to spread smallpox to the Native Americans was successful. Because many Native Americans died from smallpox during Pontiac's Rebellion, historian Francis Jennings concluded that the attempt was "unquestionably effective". But, some subsequent scholars have raised doubts about whether the smallpox outbreak can be traced to blankets from Fort Pitt with certainty."
Pontiac's War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An accusation was made that it was done during the 1800s, but I believe the evidence is scanty. Smallpox was common among whites at the time, and it often was transmitted without any conscious effort.

I suspect many of us, crowded into a fort under siege with our deaths likely, might well have endorsed such a plan.
 
#32 ·
In a nutshell, yes. The Chinese did have some pretty big ships going by their paintings and writings but again we have no written account of them coming over. Archeologist believe that most visitors came over in small, open boats. Enough room for a small family or crew living mainly off fish they caught.

Ships take a lot of resources and knowledge to build and that takes civilization. With civilization comes records and now we are back to lack of records showing sea faring races visiting the Americas.
 
#34 ·
I know this is an old thread, but just stumbled across two unrelated articles. that add more information.
The Indian shuffle gait of the Nez perce horse was pretty well documented, even today some lines of Appaloosa still do it..

And low and behold guess which horses have the same gait ? Mongolian horses.
 
#35 ·
I know this is an old thread, but just stumbled across two unrelated articles. that add more information.
The Indian shuffle gait of the Nez perce horse was pretty well documented, even today some lines of Appaloosa still do it..

And low and behold guess which horses have the same gait ? Mongolian horses.
There are spotted horses on 25,000 year old cave drawings in France, too.

That doesn't change the nearly 100% probability that the gait originated from Spanish Jennet horses - which also, by the way, had Appy LP and PATN. There still is no physical evidence Appys - or any other type of horse - was present in North America from 10,000 years ago until reintroduced by the Spanish.

As horses exited North America 10,000 years ago, and the land bridge disappeared 7,000 years ago, and considering all horses originated in North America, it is actually more factually correct that that Mongolian horses, as all horses, are descendants of North American horses. It is pretty historically clear which breeds of horses have been reintroduced to North America since the Spanish arrived, and I don't believe Mongolian horses were among them...
 
#36 · (Edited)
Here's another thing to think about. There is a long history of European and Asian trade going on before Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 1492. That trade was facilitated by the use of horses. That could explain some of the similar traits noted earlier in this thread. Lets not forget that is why Columbus sailed I the first place. To find a quicker way to Asia and trade.

Simple similar characteristics in horse structure or color to me does not rewrite history. Documentation will do it for me. If you find documentation I would love to see it.

It actually kind of funny but my father in law and I had this discussion about a year ago or so. He was saying something similar as you Joe. We were at the Lewis and Clark center in great falls mt. I just asked where he found the documentation o. It because I'd like to see it. Him being a history buff just kind of stopped pressing the issue. What I'm saying is to rewrite history you need documentation. Without it is theroy until proven otherwise.
 
#37 ·
A little hard to swallow. If the Native American tribes who quickly learned to ride and not just eat horses had had them much earlier, they would have met the Mayflower on horseback. If you do some museum research you'll find that the trading among the indigenous American people moved things like ocean shells far inwards in the continent. They weren't high in populations but they did meet any many tribes considered themselves cousins of other tribes, like the Arapahoe and the Cheyenne.
So much of America was a foodfest for the horse. They are faster and bigger than deer and elk and would have multiplied quickly, seeding pasture as they moved.
 
#70 ·
Actually, they (likely) did eat them. Prehistoric horses originated in North America, and those that stayed were wiped out about 10,000 years ago. https://www.savingamericasmustangs....tte_concluded_wild_horses_are_native_species/

Check this out: Remains Show Ancient Horses Were Hunted for Their Meat

"As the ice began to retreat on the North American continent 14,000 to 12,000 years ago, humans made their way to the New World. A massive extinction of megafauna—animals weighing more than 100 pounds (45 kilograms)—occurred in North America about 10,000 years ago. The role of humans in the extinction is the subject of debate among scientists.

"Retreating ice would cause changes in temperature, vegetation bands and probably a patchiness in vegetation and loss of habitat," said Paul McNeil, a Ph.D. candidate in paleontology at the University of Calgary who has been working the site. "This would stress the animal populations, and it wouldn't take much to push them over the edge to extinction.""
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top