U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-09-2019, 02:14 AM
 
14,120 posts, read 12,938,476 times
Reputation: 6562

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
The Mongols have a very different opinion on that. They definitely were a satellite state of the SU. Russia banned their traditional script, so that they could no longer read their own history books. Almost overnight, their libraries became useless, especially to the younger generation given schoolbooks in Cyrillic. Since 1991, there's been a revival of it. The Cyrillic script was introduced in the early to mid 1940's, at which time the traditional script was suppressed. Mongolia was, indeed, Sovietized.

Ruth, it doesn't matter what their opinion is.
Poland and Bulgaria for example were the "satellite states" as well. But they were never part of the Soviet Union.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-09-2019, 02:18 AM
 
14,120 posts, read 12,938,476 times
Reputation: 6562
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133 View Post
Having a stirrup makes just makes things easier whether you need it or not? How do people get on top of a horse without a stirrup?

If the horse is small, ( like Mongolian horses,) it's fairly easy to jump on it.

If the horse is tall however, one has to be in excellent physical shape)))





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWiiZ4G61L0
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2019, 12:35 PM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
20,019 posts, read 13,448,077 times
Reputation: 14715
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133 View Post
Having a stirrup makes just makes things easier whether you need it or not? How do people get on top of a horse without a stirrup?

Do you have proof of Greeks and romans not using stirrups?
Have you ever ridden a horse?

It's not at all hard to get on one bare back; just a little hop while you swing a leg and a push on their withers, and you're up. Or you can grab them by the mane and swing up.

The Romans and Greeks left a lot of visuals behind. There are lots of statuary, paintings on pottery, frescos, and other visuals of both cultures riding horses. Some riding bareback, some riding saddles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2019, 01:35 PM
 
14,120 posts, read 12,938,476 times
Reputation: 6562
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike View Post
Have you ever ridden a horse?

It's not at all hard to get on one bare back; just a little hop while you swing a leg and a push on their withers, and you're up. Or you can grab them by the mane and swing up.

The Romans and Greeks left a lot of visuals behind. There are lots of statuary, paintings on pottery, frescos, and other visuals of both cultures riding horses. Some riding bareback, some riding saddles.

So if you know so much about horses, how come you never warned your brother to NOT to switch to Russian ( or any European) saddle without prior knowledge of it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2019, 01:39 PM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
20,019 posts, read 13,448,077 times
Reputation: 14715
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
I had hard time understanding what you were talking about ( until that point), so I had to look up what "MCClellan saddle" is.



"In April 1855, six years before the start of the Civil War, Captain George B. McClellan sailed to Europe as part of a military commission to study developments in European tactics, weaponry, and logistics. McClellan's focus was the organization of engineer troops and cavalry. After the one-year tour, during which time McClellan observed several battles of the Crimean War, McClellan brought back almost 100 books and manuals. These he read before writing his report, which concluded with his proposed manual for American cavalry adapted from existing Russian cavalry regulations. He also proposed a cavalry saddle that he claimed was a modification of a Hungarian model used in the Prussian service."


So this explained to me a thing or two. So McClellan chose EUROPEAN prototype of the saddle for American army, and if you ( or your brother) used to ride the WESTERN saddle, then yes, you'd have a problem, because riding on it involves a totally different technique.

This is the English military saddle ( I assume) and it's darn close to the Russian military saddle.

https://www.facebook.com/britisharmy...7950523896309/


I am still puzzled that neither you ( or your brother) were aware of the differences and decided to use European saddle without knowing how to use it properly. And this of course explains his injuries.
Sorry- I thought the McClellan saddle was more well known than it seems to be.

I've ridden English saddles and Australian stock saddles, western saddles, endurance saddles and others.
A saddle is a saddle. There is no particularly 'proper' style of riding with any of them, although different styles exist. About the only thing that is a constant is the use of good posture.

While there are many types of saddles, they are all designed for one of two uses- riding for short distances, with a lot of mounting and dismounting, and riding for long distances with no dismounting for hours at a time.

Riding is a lot like driving a car. On a long drive, a seat that allows the driver to move around a bit is more comfortable. The same is true with saddles. A saddle can be roomy or fit the rider closely, but roomy is easier to make; a close saddle has to be tailored to the rider for best comfort.

The McClellan saddle has a short narrow seat that is split into 2 pieces and has a high cantle. A rider is forced to sit straight up, but when sitting straight, the open seat is like straddling a board fence. And over time, as a rider grows weary, the high and narrow cantle tends the rider's butt to go numb. To relieve the numbness, the rider has to lean forward, which throws the saddle off-kilter on the horse.

The tree of the McClellan was designed for tall bony horses, so they are as uncomfortable for the horse as the rider. But for the needs of the Civil War, when Union cavalry rode to battle and then dismounted to fight, at a time when being clamped into a saddle was a good thing in a charge, they served their purposes.

Once the cavalry went out on the great plains, however, the McClellan was terrible.

There are multiple accounts in old cavalry diaries and records about the McClellan; over time, the saddle caused the rider's backbones to become arthritic or develop fractures.

Engaged in a horseback fight, the cavalry couldn't move around in the saddle enough to defend themselves well. The tribes used this to their advantage, riding up on the cavalry at angles that forced the cavalryman to twist his back to meet the oncoming Indian and fight him from that angle instead of straight on. The Indians could move around on their horse's backs at well very fluidly.

The saddle was light, though, and could be packed with gear very efficiently. They were cheap to manufacture, durable, and because they were essentially modular and all one size, were easy to keep in service.

I never knew McClellan used the Russian saddle as his prototype! It's no wonder then why my bro thought it was terrible.

Ironically, the Southern plantation saddle was a much better all-round design that was similar, but better in all respects.
That was McClellan; the guy could make an army spit-and-polish, but he never knew a thing about putting them into battle effectively. His saddle is a microcosm of his failure as a General. And a curse on his Army, who had so many of them built they are still in use.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2019, 01:44 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
74,537 posts, read 66,170,563 times
Reputation: 71113
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
Ruth, it doesn't matter what their opinion is.
Poland and Bulgaria for example were the "satellite states" as well. But they were never part of the Soviet Union.
No one on this thread said Mongolia was part of the Soviet Union.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2019, 02:20 PM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
20,019 posts, read 13,448,077 times
Reputation: 14715
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
So if you know so much about horses, how come you never warned your brother to NOT to switch to Russian ( or any European) saddle without prior knowledge of it?
I didn't go on the trip. My brother was forewarned by the expedition guide. That's why he took his own saddle.

Either one of us could have ridden the Russian saddles. But riding them is torture.

I know about horses because they were my family's stock in trade for about 100 years until the business totally collapsed.

A part of that business was campaigning them, so my siblings and I all participated in Olympic jumping and dressage events as a part of it. It's true, however, that most of my time spent on a horse was as a cowboy. I admit I'm a better roper than a jumper.

The reason why I'm so familiar with the Appaloosa breed is because we bred them, along with some other breeds, and they are my personal favorites.

We still own our ranch, but we grow cattle now. We still have about 18 working horses, but we no longer breed for sale. I'm long retired, but my brother still manages our ranch, and I still go riding with him once in a while.

Please inform me of your qualifications. I presume you have some.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2019, 07:56 PM
 
5,699 posts, read 5,887,552 times
Reputation: 2542
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike View Post
Have you ever ridden a horse?

It's not at all hard to get on one bare back; just a little hop while you swing a leg and a push on their withers, and you're up. Or you can grab them by the mane and swing up.

The Romans and Greeks left a lot of visuals behind. There are lots of statuary, paintings on pottery, frescos, and other visuals of both cultures riding horses. Some riding bareback, some riding saddles.
I have only ever ridden horses once in my life. How you balance if horse is making turns? Plus the concept of the stirrup is so simple. People have been riding horses a long time. If they can build chariots, they can easily attach a stirrup on a saddle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2019, 08:11 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
74,537 posts, read 66,170,563 times
Reputation: 71113
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133 View Post
I have only ever ridden horses once in my life. How you balance if horse is making turns? Plus the concept of the stirrup is so simple. People have been riding horses a long time. If they can build chariots, they can easily attach a stirrup on a saddle.
Saddles weren't invented until 2000 years after the chariot. But horseback riding was "invented" about 1000 years before the chariot, maybe earlier. So people were experienced and adept at riding horses without a saddle for 3000+ years before the saddle was invented. And during that time, horses were used as war mounts, as well, and by women warriors as well as men.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:08 AM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
20,019 posts, read 13,448,077 times
Reputation: 14715
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133 View Post
I have only ever ridden horses once in my life. How you balance if horse is making turns? Plus the concept of the stirrup is so simple. People have been riding horses a long time. If they can build chariots, they can easily attach a stirrup on a saddle.
It's sort of like riding a bicycle. Once you find the right spot on the horse's back, which is usually just behind his withers (the 'shoulder blades'), it's not hard. All that's needed is to learn how to grip the horse's sides with your knees, and that doesn't need to be constant once the person falls into the horse's rhythm.

The thing is, the horse has a brain and his own set of reflexes and priorities, so the rider has to pay constant attention to the horse all the time. It gives the rider constant signals of it's intentions, and watching them is important. This can be quite relaxed, and it's not at all fearful, but neither the horse or the rider wants to be surprised.

Most beginners don't do that, especially on a well-broke placid horse. But even a big draft horse can just straight sideways in a flash, so a rider has to be prepared for those sudden moves. A nervous horse will sure tell you he's nervous. But if you're paying attention, the horse will be predictable.

Most beginners also tend to try to over-control a horse by working the bit and reins far too much. Some horses tolerate this better than others, but a happy horse who's doing the right thing doesn't need control.

Since good, experienced horses have brains and are always thinking, the best way to ride is to just forgo the need to control them and correct them when they need it. The quieter the person is, the quieter the horse will be. All bits are pain devices, so when a horse is doing the right thing, a very light touch on the reins is all that's needed. The light touch is only a cue to do something, and it doesn't hurt. Pulling hard on the reins does hurt.

A rider needs to understand a good horse is very happy to be ridden. Horses like to move out and go see the country, and dislike being cooped up in a corral. That's their nature. When the rider is reliable, and trusts the horse, the trust is returned.

There have been a few times in my life when I had to trust my horse or we could both be killed. During those times, I let the horse do all the thinking and just paid attention to staying on him and staying centered, so he wouldn't lose his balance.

There are always surly horses, of course, who don't want to be ridden, but even they will generally become happy once things begin and the rider pays attention to them.

The relationship between the animal and the person is a lot like the one we have with dogs. A horse that is always well treated, respected, and cared for will deliver it back to the rider. But being alert is the most important thing always.

Horses can become spoiled, much like dogs. A spoiled horse will want to have his way with you, but once he understands you're the boss without making it a big issue, they'll perform. But the rider always has to really watch a spoiled horse closely with more alertness. Pretty much like a spoiled dog.

A good horse often will trust its rider completely, and as long as it's given the freedom to move as it feels it must, can go to remarkable lengths to keep a rider safe and secure. They are also very willing to endanger themselves for a rider as well, sometimes. Most horses are more forgiving of our mistakes than we are theirs if there's mutual trust present.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top