# Appaloosa the Nez Perce and racist history.



## Joe4d (Sep 1, 2011)

Mr.Thunderbolt Deceased the black spotted horse

just noticed this tribute page to a members horse, check out those side shots and that horses head shape.


----------



## Faceman (Nov 29, 2007)

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...


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Faceman said:


> ...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


----------



## Joe4d (Sep 1, 2011)

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.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

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.


----------



## DancingArabian (Jul 15, 2011)

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_


----------



## Joe4d (Sep 1, 2011)

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.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

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.


----------



## Darrin (Jul 11, 2011)

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.


----------



## ridesapaintedpony (Apr 14, 2009)

Joe4d said:


> 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.


----------



## Joe4d (Sep 1, 2011)

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.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

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):


----------



## Darrin (Jul 11, 2011)

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.


----------



## Faceman (Nov 29, 2007)

Darrin said:


> 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?


----------



## tinyliny (Oct 31, 2009)

HOw would you account for the INdians themselves using words like "Big Dog" to describe an animal they apparently had never seen before.?


----------



## dbarabians (May 21, 2011)

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


----------



## Celeste (Jul 3, 2011)

Faceman said:


> 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?


He didn't mean that racism has anything to do with horses.
Just with history writers.


----------



## Faceman (Nov 29, 2007)

Celeste said:


> He didn't mean that racism has anything to do with horses.
> Just with history writers.


I realize that.

Let me rephrase...what the heck does (alleged) racism among history writers have to do with the origin of the Appaloosa?

...............................................................

I believe in keeping things simple, and this seems to be a rather simple problem to me.

Before Spaniards arrived...no horses.
After Spaniards arrived...horses

We can speculate all we want, but it isn't really any more complicated than that.

It's no different than...

Before Impressive...no HYPP
After Impressive...HYPP

We know where HYPP came from, and we know where Appys came from...


----------



## Saddlebag (Jan 17, 2011)

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.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

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.


----------



## Joe4d (Sep 1, 2011)

Faceman said:


> I realize that.
> 
> Let me rephrase...what the heck does (alleged) racism among history writers have to do with the origin of the Appaloosa?
> 
> ...



Using that logic, 
Before color tv No crystal meth,
After color tv crystal meth,
therefore color tv must be the source of crystal meth.

No doubt the spanish broguht horses, yet I dont believe they were the only or first source of horses. There is actually evidence to support Asian contact with North America.
They had the ability,
Theres a pretty widely accepted Polynesians/ south america contact.
Pueblos that supposedly speak a Japanese diaelect. ( Zuni indians)
Ok so how does doubling evey 20 years account for the asian look of the horses ? Not just the color but the general body and head shape ?

I brought up racism, as quite often our history books seem to credit everything in the world to the race and nationality of the writer. Heck just look at our accepted images and drawings of Jesus and other biblical figures. 

Fossil or burial evidence with trees to match up growth rings predating columbus would be handy, but I imagine Northwest burial rituals didnt lend themselves to preservation. The surviving horses today may or may not be linked to the original herds so again not really any way to trace the DNA.


----------



## Faceman (Nov 29, 2007)

Joe4d said:


> Using that logic,
> Before color tv No crystal meth,
> After color tv crystal meth,
> therefore color tv must be the source of crystal meth.


If you think that is the same logic as the examples I gave, then no theory you come up with would surprise me, nor is it a surprise you do not accept logic when you are confronted with it...


----------



## Celeste (Jul 3, 2011)

So here we have it. It is going to be quite the fight. In the left corner, we have bsms. In the right, faceman. The newcomer to the ring looks promising. Joe4D.
Where will you place your bets? Mine is on the young one. Joe4D.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

I dunno...a new breed standard for Appys? Looks more like halter-bred QHs...




























Chair seat alert!


----------



## Faceman (Nov 29, 2007)

Those look more like Quarterhorses to me...:lol:


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

You're all wrong, God created Appy's and placed them on the North American continent, nothing to do with the Spaniards


----------



## Chevaux (Jun 27, 2012)

Following on the Chinese brought horses with them theory and I recognize responses would be hypothetical, I have a few questions: 1) How long would such a journey take 2) How many could they get in their boats 3) Why would they bring them?


----------



## Darrin (Jul 11, 2011)

Saddlebag said:


> 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.


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.


----------



## Celeste (Jul 3, 2011)

But the Spanish people hauled them over? Were there ships bigger?


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Good, brief summary on pre-Columbus contact theories here:

Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact hypotheses - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Another good link:

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Borne-on-a-Black-Current.html?c=y&page=1


----------



## Darrin (Jul 11, 2011)

Celeste said:


> But the Spanish people hauled them over? Were there ships bigger?


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.


----------



## verona1016 (Jul 3, 2011)

Celeste said:


> But the Spanish people hauled them over? Were there ships bigger?


It's a significantly shorter journey across the Atlantic than it is across the Pacific.


----------



## Joe4d (Sep 1, 2011)

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.


----------



## Faceman (Nov 29, 2007)

Joe4d said:


> 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...


----------



## Fort fireman (Mar 5, 2011)

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.


----------



## Corporal (Jul 29, 2010)

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.


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

It is possible that there were horses still here in the US prior to the Spanish coming here but they were likely not Appys. but a pony similar to the UK Exmoor. The Exmoor pony has a unique jaw feature which has been found in older fossils remains in the US leading many experts to believe that this is where the pony originated in its more prehistoric form. The breed also has other primitive characteristics such as the make up of its coat, the heavy bony ridge above the eyes
Its said that the horse disappeared from the US where it evolved 60 million years ago at about the same time as humans entered it, crossing the Bering Straits and going in opposite directions and as the Indians themselves seemed to have little knowledge of horses when the Spanish arrived it was assumed they hunted what were left to extinction - that might not have been the case though and the large ridden Spanish horses would have looked very different to the small rough hairy ponies they saw only as a food source.
Spotted ponies were commonplace in European history and the cave paintings in France that depict them date back to c.25000 years ago, Europeans also traded with the Chinese and the spotted horses from that region became highly prized by the Spanish so I think that they are the most likely source of the appaloosa.


----------



## Fort fireman (Mar 5, 2011)

, Europeans also traded with the Chinese and the spotted horses from that region became highly prized by the Spanish so I think that they are the most likely source of the appaloosa.

That was what I was trying to say jaydee. Thank you, just couldn't get it to come out right on the screen.


----------



## Faceman (Nov 29, 2007)

jaydee said:


> It is possible that there were horses still here in the US prior to the Spanish coming here but they were likely not Appys. but a pony similar to the UK Exmoor. The Exmoor pony has a unique jaw feature which has been found in older fossils remains in the US leading many experts to believe that this is where the pony originated in its more prehistoric form. The breed also has other primitive characteristics such as the make up of its coat, the heavy bony ridge above the eyes
> Its said that the horse disappeared from the US where it evolved 60 million years ago at about the same time as humans entered it, crossing the Bering Straits and going in opposite directions and as the Indians themselves seemed to have little knowledge of horses when the Spanish arrived it was assumed they hunted what were left to extinction - that might not have been the case though and the large ridden Spanish horses would have looked very different to the small rough hairy ponies they saw only as a food source.
> Spotted ponies were commonplace in European history and the cave paintings in France that depict them date back to c.25000 years ago, Europeans also traded with the Chinese and the spotted horses from that region became highly prized by the Spanish so I think that they are the most likely source of the appaloosa.


Let me repeat...there is absolutely no evidence - nada - that horses lived in North America between 10,000 years ago until the Spanish arrived...no fossils, no myths, no legends...nothing. There was no "mystery pony" that survived and lived nearly 9,000 years, leaving no evidence.

However, your conclusion is absolutely logical and correct...Spanish Jennets, from which the original Appys and of course Pasos are descended, originated primarily from far eastern Asian horses with some unknowns mixed in - probably Barbs.

Some people, myself included, believe that the original Appys bred by the Nez Perce WERE Spanish Jennets period - later crossed with drafts and other horses that became available, that changed the Appy from its original light and rangey conformation to a thicker stockier conformation, and then even later crossed to produce a stock breed by the white man, resulting in the typical modern Appy we see today. True foundation Appy breeders produce the intermediate Appy - the thicker type with draft blood, but I know of nowhere that you can find an Appy that is so pure as to justify being labeled an "original" Appy/Spanish Jennet...the same being said for the now extinct Spanish Jennet itself, that is in the process of being recreated as closely as possible...


----------



## Saddlebag (Jan 17, 2011)

It is known that at one time the continental shelf on all the continents was above water. This means one could cross the Bering Sea without water craft. That is likely when Asian horses crossed the Bering Sea, especially as pack animals. People move to new areas for a variety of reasons. One major difference between the Nez Perce horses and the Spanish was that these little horses could gallop all day long and also did an easy gait that has come to be known as the appaloosa shuffle. The history of north america has been badly distorted in the white man's quest to prove superiority. Who is rapidly destroying this planet - the "superior" white man, not the Indians.


----------



## Saddlebag (Jan 17, 2011)

Faceman, it was the early American cavalry to turned draft stallions in with the Indian horses to get rid of the shuffle and create a heavier slower breed. They only partly succeeded.


----------



## dbarabians (May 21, 2011)

Ghengis Khan and his descendants conqured much of the known world on the backs of the Mongol horse. From China to Eastern Europe . those Icelandic horses look a lot like those the mongols use today.
Without hard factual evidence there is no way to logically dispute the fact that horses were first introduced back to the Americas by the Spainish.
Oral history of the Native American Tribes gives us insight into their introduction to the modern horse. Shalom


----------



## Joe4d (Sep 1, 2011)

nothing I have said anywhere has anythnig to do with 10,000 years ago. I dont know why you keep harping on it. 
I said that the Nez perce horses came from Asian trade or contact prior to a huge influx of Spanish horses. When were the mongols tryign to conquer the world ? 12-1300 hundred ish ? Chinese were saiing around in 14 hundred. Currents would carry them to pacific northwest. If all these horses came from spain, Why didnt all the advanced breeding horse cultures come from mexican area ? 
There isnt really any written record one way or another. That I am aware of until Lewis and clark arrived. There was some exploration in the area earlier by Europeans. That probably left notes. And also quite a bit of evidence of asian contact off and on.


----------



## Kati (Feb 24, 2013)

I really have no idea, but with the ships of the time, I imagine it would also be possible that those very currents that would bring them there prevented them from going back. I don't really know, and honestly haven't really studied any of this so feel free to ignore. I agree that there's no proof so everything is just speculation, but I also agree that history has been greatly distorted. Particularly American history. Anyway... It would really only take a few ships carrying horses getting swept off course. If the ship was damaged or even just lost, and it's quite possible there wouldn't be any records. A huge part of records would have required returning to Asia which could easily have been impossible.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Celeste (Jul 3, 2011)

So Joe, are you suggesting that some of the appaloosas were here before the Spaniards brought over horses -- not from before 10,000 years ago, but maybe brought in by Asian ships in somewhat more modern history? Just trying to clarify. It is an interesting idea.


----------



## Joe4d (Sep 1, 2011)

read a couple diary and travel reports of some early french explorers to wyoming and montana, seems they crossed paths with the "People of the Horse" in the early 1700's. Also Dakota language by that time was full of horse related words. 
Something I have read which may put a better time line on things. Problem is hard to pen down a date. especially when the gap is only a couple hundred years. Seems the NezPerce diet and living quarters changed after they became a horse culture. Prior to owning horses they didnt eat or use buffalo products.


----------



## Joe4d (Sep 1, 2011)

yeh basically some trading and contacts with some of the documented Chinese navigators in the 1400's.


----------



## Celeste (Jul 3, 2011)

But would 1700's preclude those horses just coming from Spain?


----------



## dbarabians (May 21, 2011)

There are no known fossils of a modern horse such as those the native americans had when Lewis and Clark made their journey.
Without that evidence there is nothing to back up the claim of horses not of spainish origin among the tribes. Shalom


----------



## Joe4d (Sep 1, 2011)

in my mind yes. to short a time period for an entire culture, language, breeding program and way of life to spring up. Been reading about the great Pueblo uprising of 1680, which according to mainstream history is the beginning of the wild north american herds. 
I would think only 30 or so years later, half a continent away horses sourced form there would still be a novelty, not a way of life, complete with advanced breeding practices.
They had em for a least a few hundred years.


----------



## Joe4d (Sep 1, 2011)

lack of fossils it totally meaningless. An animal is more likely to die of lightning strike than to leave a fossil. Of all the LIVING animals we know about only about 5% of them have ever left a fossil that has been found. Also I ahve been talking about trade in the last 600-800 years.


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

Though I can see that its very possible that the Chinese did set foot on US soil in early history I think the distance would have likely prohibited them from bringing livestock of any size. Those brought here by the Spanish and later British were done so for the main reason of them remaining here as settlers and the distance much shorter
Fossil remains of Equus have been found on every continent except Australia and Antartica. 
It is true that fossil remains are very rare in terms of the numbers of animals that existed and history constantly reminds us that its not wise to say that something didn't exist purely based on it being seen - this was a vast country and many parts of it were never trodden on so small primitive ponies may have remained here and survived and even interbred with the more recent feral stock abandoned by the spanish. When you consider the numbers of carnivores that roamed and bred more prolifically anything that they caught would be pretty much totally consumed
I still don't see that the native Indians would have viewed them as anything more than 'lunch'.


----------



## Celeste (Jul 3, 2011)

It should be easy enough to compare the DNA of appaloosas and Spanish horses and Mongolian horses and determine ancestry. The technology is either there or will be soon.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Joe4d said:


> ... to short a time period for an entire culture, language, breeding program and way of life to spring up...They had em for a least a few hundred years.


So...you think the Plains Indians ALSO got their horses from the Chinese?

How long has it taken our culture to start revolving around computers? I took a class in college using punchcards to program a mainframe in Illinois (IIRC), while my 2 year old granddaughter seems quite capable of navigating her way around on Mommy's tablet. Heck, even 20 years ago, I had 5.25 floppies on my desk!


----------



## Faceman (Nov 29, 2007)

Joe4d said:


> nothing I have said anywhere has anythnig to do with 10,000 years ago. I dont know why you keep harping on it.
> I said that the Nez perce horses came from Asian trade or contact prior to a huge influx of Spanish horses. When were the mongols tryign to conquer the world ? 12-1300 hundred ish ? Chinese were saiing around in 14 hundred. Currents would carry them to pacific northwest. If all these horses came from spain, Why didnt all the advanced breeding horse cultures come from mexican area ?
> There isnt really any written record one way or another. That I am aware of until Lewis and clark arrived. There was some exploration in the area earlier by Europeans. That probably left notes. And also quite a bit of evidence of asian contact off and on.


I don't know - why do you keep harping on a fantasy? Forget about horses for a moment. For many years people have been trying to determine if there was Asian contact with North America prior to the Spanish. There is no evidence of it, and civilizations do not make contact without leaving evidence. There is evidence of contact with SOUTH America, but not North America, although Indians (native Americans) are descended from both immigrants over the land bridge and immigrants from South America. However, there is no evidence of horses in South America prior to the Spanish, any more than there is evidence in North America.

Fossils aside, if there were horses here prior to the Spanish, we would know about it. A culture, particularly a primitive culture, is not going to have horses without leaving evidence of it. Sometimes that evidence is a long time in being found, as in L'Anse aux Meadows where the Vikings settled 1,000 years ago, but there would be clear and present evidence of a settlement only 600 years ago - particularly as populated as the Left Coast is - it is not exactly wilderness.

One may conjure up all kinds of theories...horse swam here from China themselves, horses crossed the Arctic and came down from Canada, or were transported here by aliens that wanted to repopulate them, or a big tornado carried them over and dropped them gently on the Left Coast. But why conjure up theories when the evidence is clear...there were no horses here before the Spanish, Appys are descended from Spanish stock, were later crossed with other breeds arrived from the East, and Appys became a mixed breed, which they remain today. Some people want to sensationalize or glorify the origin of Appys, but then some people aren't satisfied to have "just" a bay or a chestnut - there has to be some speeshul tag attached. The Spanish brought them over, the Indians stole them or traded for them or got ahold of them one way or another, and bred them - as the evidence suggests. No big mystery...


----------



## ropinbiker (Aug 3, 2012)

I think the adding in of accusations of "racism" do not lend a true sense of fair debate, and it also puts an unwanted, and somewhat edgy, tenor into the whole thing. Yes, there are bad white people, as there are bad people of EVERY race and religion and sex and.....

Most folks just want to get to the truth...I don't like being called a racist because I am white(in fact, anyone calling someone a racist because they are "white" is, actually, racist)...I am also part Cherokee (my ancestors are the Holders from Oklahoma--some of which "robbed" the natives of their land by only paying a penny or so an acre..--but some of them embraced the native folks and that's, of course, where I get the Cherokee blood).

Yes, at times, some folks took advantage of their position and tried to rewrite history. But, usually, it is fixed by someone doing the "right" thing. Throughout history the "victors" have been the ones that write the history of that time, and at times, they wrote it to favor themselves. However, through research and using artifacts, diaries, etc. we usually end up getting somewhere close to the truth. Russians (soviets at the time) were not taught in school that Stalin massacred over 20 million, and as many as 40 or 60 million, of his OWN people to ensure his hard line communist(dictator, really) approach would prevail. Most of us weren't taught in high school that most of the slaves that were brought to America were already enslaved by other Africans of a different tribe, and then sold to the slave traders. Somehow, it was all the "white man's" fault. 

And, saddlebag, it's not really the "white man" that is destroying the planet...most of the world's unregulated pollution is coming from China, and some other lesser "non-white" countries..... The "white man" is actually leading the way in trying to protect the planet, along with folks of other ancestry....

Now, to the topic, I think it was probably the Spaniards that brought in the horses that made up the bulk of the horses here. I don't think, as some say, it is entirely impossible that there were some smaller, ponies running around...but, since most accounts written by those moving North from Mexico, or East from the early colonies, give no account of meeting "mounted" natives, then it is unlikely that there were "horse people" prior the Spaniards inflluence.


----------



## Joe4d (Sep 1, 2011)

Celeste said:


> It should be easy enough to compare the DNA of appaloosas and Spanish horses and Mongolian horses and determine ancestry. The technology is either there or will be soon.


actually they cant. The original horses are all dead, or in bred out of existance with western stock. Most of the herds were killed when Joseph surrendered, some ranchers here and thier made claims to have preserved some, but the Army's policy was to exterminate the breed, wither from killing or releasing Draft stallions. And it is likely once Spanish stock eventually did arrive on scene there was cross breeding going on.


----------



## Joe4d (Sep 1, 2011)

history always has racial overtones. go look at any western drawing of Jesus, when he probably didnt look like that. Ask any kid to describe indians, bet the Hollywood version comes to mind. Just the way it is. Whatever group you are in was the good guys, whatever group your not in is the bad guys. 
I think our mainstream history books greatly discredit what other cultures have accomplished. 
Actually there is some evidence of horses in South America cave drawings including images that resemble Chinese Cavalry. 
Also the horses in the north west 
Resembling asian horses,
Gaiting like Asian horses,
Being part of a language and culture and very well established with huge herds of a unique breed, only a brief time after the earliest Spanish horses showed up on scene, IS the evidence of Asian trade. 
Sorry but I dont take school history books as the gospel I find more and more distortions and out right fabrications every day.
For many years I am sure everyone laughed at stories of Red and Leif Erickson exploring North America 3 hundred years before Columbus.


----------



## ropinbiker (Aug 3, 2012)

I was taught that Red and Leif were here ....

I was also taught about how Indians were treated, we watched the Wounded Knee documentary...and I was schooled in Texas.

Still, no need to make it a racist thing....


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

I don't think its fair to play the 'race card'. The majority of Europeans feel very guilty about they way their ancestors treated the American Indian, Aborigine, African and Maori populations.
There is no reason to not think that people from Europe could have made it to the Americas in small sea crafts but not bringing animals - the journey was far too long to have space for provisions for them
Heyerdahl did his sea voyages in crafts made to primitive designs to show that people could have made the journeys all around the globe taking with them their own histories. 
Thor Heyerdahl
The cave paintings in South America could well have been made by a people who travelled there from countries where horses were well known but not essentially that they took them with them or still had access to them
The gaited horses of the Mongolians spread to all parts of Europe. There are historical references to horses that moved at a gait or amble from as far back as 6000BCE - attached link to info on them in European History as the references to gaited horses in Europe pre-date those of the Chinese


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

^^^^
Forgot link - its worth reading
About Us


----------



## dbarabians (May 21, 2011)

Joe those chinese horse were probably the same as the ones used by Mongols today. the same horse the Genghis Khan conqured much of the known world with. that might very well explain how horses from europe inherited that same gait. Like I posted earlier those Icelandic horses resemble the modern day Mongol horse. They also gait.
The chinese kept very accurate records of minute details of their voyages and trading expeditions. 
There is no documented evidence of a major voyage or discovery of a new continent. NONE 
Romantic notions aside, without any written or physical evidence the theory you are posting about is just that a romantic theory someone has thought up to challenge the known history of the world. Shalom


----------



## Saddlebag (Jan 17, 2011)

Joe4D, I agree 100%. When we think of the much larger animals that roamed this continent, why would bones of almost anything exist. Death resulted in food for another. There is an assumption that the Indians had little to do with buffalo until the horse. That is another fallacy. We all know about heel flies. They would converge on the buffalo, attacking their heels for a blood mean and the herd would begin to run to escape the flies. They liked to head for water and this would result in huge stampedes (out of control). If there was a steep embankments then hundred, maybe thousands of animals ran to their deaths. The roar of a stampede was herd for miles so the Indians would converge on the carcasses.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

The problem with blaming an absence of fossils on the difficulty of fossils forming is that we DO have evidence from previous millenia. And since we're dealing with things that happened 1-2,000 years ago, we also have lots of other indicators - toys, drawings, equipment, etc. Yet none of that exists for horses in America in 1000 AD.

Once horses were re-introduced, there once again becomes a lot of evidence for their presence. So why the gap in the evidence. Plentiful, then nothing, then plentiful? How did many thousands and thousands of people stop noticing horses? And then start noticing again?


----------



## Palomine (Oct 30, 2010)

Indians called the horse Big Dog, as they had no knowledge of them. Later changed in some tribes to Big Elk.

http://www.muskingum.edu/~rmunkres/indians/Indians.html

The cowboy encyclopedia - Richard W. Slatta - Google Books

And story related herein is of a Cree Indian talking about a horse slain in battle, that Indians went to admire and marvel over. They did not know its name...but since it was in servitude to the white man, decided it must be a type of dog, just very big.

If horses had been here before came with Spanish?

Would have some record of them orally, in writings or in drawings in caves.


----------



## Missy May (Feb 18, 2012)

Joe4d said:


> 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 ?


The seven cities of gold might have been a fable, but the spanish looking for it was not. They also had literate padres that kept journals and even build missions along the way....long before 1804.


----------



## Wau Tau (Feb 18, 2013)

I don't believe this was mentioned earlier so here it is. 
It is very easy to change the physical form of an animal very quickly. There is a study being done in Russia with foxes where they breed them only for tameness and with in 9 generations the foxes had floppy ears and patchy coats with in 13 generations they had curly tails and within 15 generations a few foxes were exhibiting shortened tails. This was from 1959-1975 and they weren't even breeding for these traits. Horses in a new environment would have needed to change and natural selection would have quickly selected for smaller hardier animals like Mongolian horses. Also, the gait that Appy's exhibit could have evolved separately. Changing one gene can create multiple other changes(like the foxes) the gene for that body type in horses may somehow be linked to the gene for that gait (that of course is if the gait is gene based I don't know I'm just going off what I've seen on this thread).


----------



## Celeste (Jul 3, 2011)

A recent study identified a recessive gene for gaiting. 

Horse gait traced to single mutation : Nature News & Comment


----------



## EliRose (Aug 12, 2012)

Corporal said:


> 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.


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.""


----------



## Smokum (May 4, 2012)

Just found this article about the Nez Perce Tribe & the horse registry 
Nez Perce


----------

