Talk:Horse people

Untitled

A Horse people is a nomadic or semi-nomadic ethnicity, typically inhabiting the Eurasian steppes, with an emphasis on horse breeding and horse riding.

Just out of curiosity: since when horse riding became a criterion of ethnicity? Had ethnicity of, say, prairie Indians, changed after arriving of a horse with the Spaniards? Or it doesn't matter because they didn't inhabit the Eurasian steppes? Can you cite any up-to-date ethnographic or historical literature to support that classification? --Barbatus 00:42, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

"ethnicity" is just a fancy word for "people". a "horse people" ("equestrian nomads") are a people with the characteristic that they spend a lot of time horseriding. If at some time in the past they didn't ride a lot, I don't know if their "ethnicity" changed, but they certainly changed from a non-"horse people" to a "horse people". The question is moot, really, since there is no clear way do delineate an "ethnicity", either synchronically or diachronically, but if you know a better way to phrase it, please do. dab (ᛏ) 06:21, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

However vague various definitions of 'people,' 'ethnos,' or 'ethnic group' are, there should be some weight in them, for othervise ethnography, ethnology and other related disciplines have nothing to study. The thing is, a single common element (even nomadism, because the same ethnos could change its way of life from nomadic to a settled on and vice versa) could not be a defining one for an ethnic affiliation. I suspect that the source for your article was the German Reitervölker, which, in its turn, had most probably been taken from some 19th or early 20th century German encyclepaedia, now outdated. Even if it still has some merit and the very term 'horse people' could be used in English (see, for example, the discussion under Reitervölker in German Wiki), it should be changed to plural 'peoples' and 'ethnic groups' (which would be more exact translation from German and less misleading). Do you agree? --Barbatus 14:01, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

more or less. Both "Reitervölker" and "horse people" are more literary than ethnological terms. This article is about a concept. If it is an ethnologically untenable one, let the article say as much. I considered putting the article at equestrian nomads, too, but apart from stylistic issues I couldn't find much of a difference ('equestrian nomad' sounds a lot more erudite, while meaning pretty much the same thing). So, basically, if you think something should be fixed, fix it. Yes, we are looking at a term of 19th century scholarship here, as explored, e.g., by T.A. Shippey in "Goths and Huns, the Rediscovery of Northern culture in the 19th century", where I think he uses "horse-folk" as a synonym. We could use an overview of the term's history here, for example. Nevertheless, "Eurasian equestrian nomads" are a historical reality, regardless of what you call them, and their incursions have had an enormous impact on history, these past millennia. dab (ᛏ) 15:01, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I didn't want to mess with the article: you are the original author, so you have the ius primae noctis, so to speak. ... By the way, do you think the Goths and other Germanic tribes really could be placed under the same 'horse people' (or whatever we'll call 'em eventually) with Scythians and Mongols? --Barbatus 15:58, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

the *early* Goths rode with the Huns. That's, say, 150 to 270 AD or so. As you say, their "ethnicity" didn't change overnight as they stopped raiding; still "ethnicity" is at least partially a cultural term, so if your people does nothing but horseriding for six generations, you may well be considered a member of an "equestrian ethnicity" imho. If your tribe then sacks Rome and changes their barbarian ways, you may retain your language and your ethnonym, but your culture has still changed. It's like with settled gipsies/Roma. They are still Roma, of course, but they are settled/assimilated Roma, as opposed to 'classical' Roma for whom a nomadic lifestyle was part of their culture. dab (ᛏ) 17:24, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm ... If memory serves me, Goths came to the North Black Sea region from the Baltic, where, together with other Germans, even though they were familiar with horses and had them, they weren't probably those 'equestrial nomads.' From the Norht Black Sea littoral, the Goths raided the Eastern Roman Empire both overland and over sea, and I don't recall the Huns ever been accused in the latter. So the Goths 'rode with Huns' only when some of them were taken along with the tide. ... Anyhow, I'm going to change the first phrase to something like 'A Horse people: a generalized and somewhat obsolete term for various nomadic or semi-nomadic ethnic groups ...' OK? --Barbatus 17:53, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

that's fine. Yes, the Goths didn't start out as a "horse people" at all. They came in contact with Huns and Alans etc., and fought both with and against them, before they again settled in stable kingdoms. This century or so however was enough to give them a reputation as formidable cavalrymen both among medieval annalists and romantic British gentleman scholars. I daresay modern scholarship would not over-emphasize the 'equestrian' nature of the Goths, but for one century, roughly 150 to 250, they were definitely part of the 'equestrian' crowd. I'm not trying to make a point here, except that when discussing the 19th century concept, we cannot leave out the Goths :) dab (ᛏ) 18:09, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gumilyov

I must object here: Gumilyov had never doubted historicity of the Mongol invasion and subsequent yoke. What he did, though, was major re-interpretation of the events and busting of many, mostly patriotic and nationalistic, myths created around them. Just where did you get that stuff? --Barbatus 18:47, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thanks to you I just flipped through (figuratively speaking, 'cuz it was on-line) his Ancient Rus' and the Great Steppe, which I read some 15 years ago ... so I had to check myself (fortunately, it's available on the Net, though only in Russian). Even the alleged idealization of nomads by Gumilyov is pretty doubtful. I'd suggest to remove the whole phrase. --Barbatus 02:21, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This article is more helpful. --Ghirlandajo

merge

maybe this article should be merged, and become a section in the more comprehensive Eurasian nomads? dab (ᛏ) 10:13, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Probably a good idea :) --Barbatus 11:06, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

agreed, but I'm too lazy to do it just now. dab (ᛏ) 13:06, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That makes two of us, hee-hee. --Barbatus 14:35, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Books ...

... could be useful, even if you're going to merge your horsemen with other nomads. I hope. --Barbatus 02:19, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

definitely. Your bibliographical additions to chariot are also good. I hope with a little effort, we can raise the chariot article to FA quality soon. dab (ᛏ) 05:51, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

fr:Peuple Cavalier