The Horse of America in His Derivation, History, and DevelopmentWallace, John Hankins
History
The Horse of America in His Derivation, History, and Development
Wallace, John Hankins
Horse breeds -- History; Horses -- Breeding -- United States; Horses -- United States -- History
Numbers 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 are all unsatisfactory as to their
origin. Number 17—Lord Godolphin’s horse—is wholly unknown as to his
blood elements, and further on his history will be considered. Number 18
“was brought over,” but from whence nobody knows. Number 19 is in the
same condition, and not one of his different owners has been able to
tell us anything about his origin. Number 21 was, possibly, an Arabian,
but the Duke of Newcastle, who knew the horse well, seems to have doubted
his genuineness on account of his inferiority. However this may have
been, he preceded other importations so many years that it is not known
that he ever sired a colt, and as a progenitor we may as well strike
him out. Number 22 seems to be in darkness, and all efforts to find his
origin having failed he may as well be classed as unknown. Number 23
is furnished with no evidence that he was entitled to be classed as an
Arabian. Numbers 24 and 25 were confessedly not genuine.
This reduces the analysis to its lowest form and shows that in the
original foundation stock, including Mr. Darley’s horse (13), there were
ten Turks and six Barbs that can be accepted with reasonable certainty.
This leaves eight so-called “Arabians,” from which we must eliminate
numbers 17, 21, 24, 25, leaving numbers 18, 19, 22, 23, without any
evidence whatever that they were Arabians except in name. From these four
rather obscure animals, therefore, according to the Rous dictum, the
English race horse must have derived every drop of his blood; and yet
there is not a scintilla of evidence either direct or inferential that
any one of them, or the ancestors of any one of them, ever saw Arabia.
From the custom of calling every horse from abroad an “Arabian,” that
has prevailed in England for more than two hundred years, it is fair to
conclude that there was no Arabian blood in the foundation stock. It
was the blood of the Turks and the Barbs, commingled with that of the
native blood that had been bred to race for centuries, that furnished the
foundation of the modern English and American race horse.
Blood in the race horse is an imperative necessity, but it must be blood
that has been carefully selected from winners, and raced for generations,
or it is of no value as an element of speed. If the English race horse
had been a strictly pure exotic from Arabia Deserta, as Admiral Rous
maintained, he would have been of no value either as a race horse or the
progenitor of race horses, without many generations of careful selection
and development of speed.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account