Don't hoof it: the horse as a strategic resource and a cosmic symbol
The book by David Heifetz, an independent expert on Asian history, is originally titled "Raiders, Rulers, and Traders," and the subtitle "The Horse and the Rise of Empires" outlines the structure of a study tracking the rise, fall, and rivalry of Eurasia's major empires (Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran, India, China, Great Mongolia, Russia, Britain) from 500-400 BC to the First World War. Critic Lidia Maslova presents the book of the week, especially for Izvestia.
David Heifetz
"On Horseback: How horsemen changed World History"
M. : Alpina non-fiction, 2026. — translated from English — 534 p.
The epilogue of the book also looks into modern times, describing the fascinating equestrian game of buzkashi ("tug of the goat") at the court of Zahir Shah, the last king of Afghanistan, and the first two chapters are devoted to the prehistoric period when man and horse only looked at each other. In the chapter "Domestication for milk," Heifetz says that the domestication of the genus Equus occurred rather late (compared, for example, with a dog that became a friend of man 20 thousand years earlier) and also turned out to be shallow, as evidenced by the environmental experience of 2008: 325 Przewalski horses raised in captivity were released into the original Mongolian habitat, and when "the feral herd increased to two thousand individuals, the foals quickly lost the desire to communicate with people."
The second chapter tells about the penetration of horse breeders into the settled world from 2000 to 500 BC. This is an important dichotomy for the entire book, and for the entire human history, defining the way of life and mentality of two social strata — "sedentary farmers and nomadic pastoralists," and the struggle, interaction, expansion, or desire to isolate themselves from each other, but sometimes the inevitable social diffusion between agricultural civilizations and steppe states is the main geopolitical factor. the plot of the book. However, Heifetz considers it necessary to correct the familiar, traditional word "nomad", since it "can mislead us and make us think that steppe pastoralists are some kind of restless wanderers, as sedentary peoples often considered them. I prefer to call them horse breeders, because it is this occupation that distinguishes them from all other peoples, including other nomads who did not breed horses."
The book covers the problems of breeding (feeding, grazing, care, treatment, training) horses in different periods in different regions in detail and in many ways — the survival of a particular nation or empire ultimately depended on the quantity and quality of horse stock. At the time described, the possession of such a precious strategic resource as a herd of horses capable of effectively participating in raids and battles was roughly similar to today's possession of nuclear weapons, and the expression "equestrian power" in the context of the geopolitical layouts analyzed by Heifetz actually sounds like "nuclear".
However, in addition to the purely pragmatic motivation of human attachment to the horse, one should not discount general cultural considerations, and sometimes even quite disinterested admiration for the beauty of the amazing creation of nature, reflected in a variety of artifacts: "The culture of horse breeding was the subject of admiration and imitation for all sedentary civilizations of the steppes, as evidenced by the terracotta Chinese horses of the Tang Empire, magnificent scarlet silver horse harness from the treasury of the Moscow Kremlin and amazing equestrian portraits made by Indian artists of the Mughal era."
Sometimes Heifetz even lets in a little philosophy and esotericism: "The Buddhists projected on the horse the image of the human soul: timid, flighty and yet obedient. In the conflicts raging in the animal's soul, they saw conflicts flaring up inside each of us." In addition, in ancient mythologies, the horse is often seen as a liminal animal capable of connecting worlds and "surmounting the barriers between day and night, between the tamed and the wild."
As for the slippery issue of the infringement of animal rights (of which the horse is perhaps the most consistently and cruelly exploited by humans), it is not generally relevant to the topic of this historical study. Nevertheless, the author, who emphasizes that "no animal has had such an impact on the history of mankind," finds a lot of heartfelt and very flattering lines for the horse, as if smoothing out the sharp corners. Heifetz belongs to the caring people who believe that the human pleasure of communicating with a horse is absolutely mutual, despite the fact that his tools are usually painful and traumatic pieces of metal for the animal. In the field of horse harness development, the writer several times notes with satisfaction the progress that is obvious to him: the trenzel bit, which replaced a simple gnawing rod, a metal rod inserted into the horse's mouth, consists of two connected parts and provides the rider with contact with the animal's tongue, lips and cheeks, allowing him to send more subtle signals to the horse without injuring her mouth."
Here, Heifetz is more wishful thinking: pain, after all, remains the main lever of horse control even in our humane times, when it became fashionable to refer to the biochemical term "oxytocin" as the "hormone of love." Heifetz also harnesses him to interspecific communication between humans and horses when it comes to domestication for mare's milk: "By a strange coincidence, it turned out that milk mares produce more oxytocin. Oxytocin, the "love hormone," helped horses form emotional bonds with humans, which gave rise to a much deeper attachment that exists between our species today and is unlike the relationship between humans and other domesticated animals." What the writer calls a "strange coincidence" is more likely a biological pattern: oxytocin is a hormone that stimulates lactation, but this is probably too prosaic for Heifetz, who makes a dubious romantic assumption: "Maybe the hormone of love helped horses come to terms with the rider on the back."
However, after a couple of dozen pages, Heifetz writes that the most reliable archaeological evidence of the existence of horseback riding is orthopedic in nature: these are traces of injuries to riders and animals (pathology of horse remains with signs of arthritis and fusion of spinal vertebrae have been observed since about 2000 BC) And finally, talking about the idea of a man harnessing a horse to a chariot The historian leaves the lyrics about the hormone of love and uses more honest words: "Like horse riding, trying to harness a horse is also an act of violence."
And it was hardly voluntary, joyful, or oxytocin-fueled for horses to participate in the traditional practice of grooming, which transforms a skittish stallion into a more docile and manageable gelding that can be more easily and quickly trained to the saddle. In addition, "geldings were hardier, more reliable, and suffered less thirst than stallions; even Temuchin did not ride stallions." The objective zootechnical necessity of grooming is understandable, however, it is difficult to get rid of a slight stylistic dissonance, which consists in the fact that the hyper-masculine greatest conquerors, splashing with testosterone, actually pranced on castrates, deprived of manhood even in the tender foal age.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
