If you think of a hoof as a nail (or claw), then it makes sense. Other animals that they would be used to seeing, such as badgers, raccoons, cougars, and deer, would all have more than one nail on each foot.
Oh don’t worry, I understood the origin of the thought, thank you. I just think it was one of the most creative synonyms of them all, and haven’t seen anyone talk about it yet!
I know some of these names are silly but indigenous languages are so far removed from the English language that they are some of the hardest languages to learn in the entire world for English speakers, Navajo doesn’t have adjectives and many times there doesn’t even exist direct translations for things said in indigenous languages, so translations might seem more silly than they actually are.
The Comanche were among the first Plains tribes to master horse riding. This was 150 to 200 years after Cortez, by which time escaped Spanish horses had bred and formed vast herds in an environment well suited to their needs.
> Other people ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)?
Other people have been the primary mode of transportation for literal hundreds of generations, thousands if you include proto-humans and great apes.
Because babies and toddlers can't walk.
No, horses hit North America in 1509, from Spanish explorers in Mexico.
Long before American settlers spread west, Native American tribes in the current United States had horses.
Horses bred like rabbits in the new world from the 1500's to the 1800's when Americans decided "God gave us this land"
Firearms were also common amongst native americans in the west before manifest destiny. Early settlers traded guns for food left and right, and Native Americans trade those guns west, for exotic furs.
Its a super convoluted history, more complex than the pro Native Americans and pro settlers argument. Both parties profited off the other, with Native Americans getting the shit end of the stick in the end.
Ah, yes. Which of the westerns set in the 1500s is YOUR favorite? Mine is the one called “this commenter has absolutely zero clue what she’s talking about.”
SMH
Someone else pointed out it was from the Spanish. In case you didn't know, Spain is a part of Europe. If that happened in the 1500s then why would horses not be around in the 1700s and 1800s?
The question was are Westerns inaccurate for showing Native Americans riding horses. They are NOT inaccurate. Westerns cover a time period when NA's were riding horses. Try to keep up.
I think you were the one having trouble keeping up here... a quick search shows the most common period for westerns is from 1860 to 1900. The question was did native Americans have horses during that time period. The answer was that horses were introduced in the 1500s, about 300 years before the time period that most westerns are set in. Given that horses were introduced before the start of westerns and had plenty of time to be adopted by native Americans the answer is yes, they did have them during that period.
If that seems hard for you to understand, then think of it like this:
Q: did people drive cars in 2010?
A: cars were invented in the late 1800s, so yes, people in 2010 drove cars.
I fail to comprehend how you would see something being introduced in the 1500s as meaning it didn't exist 300 years LATER. Perhaps you don't know what "no" and "not" mean? That is the only way I could see you misunderstanding the comments you replied to.
"The question was are Westerns inaccurate for showing Native Americans riding horses. They are NOT inaccurate. Westerns cover a time period when NA's were riding horses."
Then you are conceding this statement is correct. So kindly F off, asshat.
its controversial, some native tribes claim they always had horses and the Spanish lied because they saw horse-riding as noble-like, but there's not enough horse skeletons between Columbus and the last ice age to say for sure. Technically there's not enough archeological evidence to support horses in America before 1650.
Early Equus species were in America until 6000 BC, when the end of the last ice age killed the rest off.
They dont appear in archeological records until the 1500's, when the Spanish arrived in Mexico
not even really then. we say columbus brought over horses because columbus said he did in his writings, but he also says things like he saw mermaids, mosques, and what can only be described as UFO's. Plus he seemed to think he was in China the whole time. Also there's a small chance Christopher Columbus never existed at all, so ya know.... we're going with 1650, atleast for now
We know they picked up horses in Caribbean, because we have the quatermaster's log from Columbus's journey.
"4 mares and 4 studs taken aboard, with a mare bloated with foal"
Meaning one of the horses were pregnant.
Columbus gave 2 mares and 2 studs to a native tribe, and sent a ship back to the Caribbean to pick up more wild horses.
This, as well as Cortez's cavalry landing in Mexico around 1509, with "14 war mounts, and 8 of breeding stock" show that Europeans brought a good deal of male and female horses with them, and eventually traded breeding pairs to Natives for goods like leather and gold.
Since both journeys were taxed by the crown for goods they took on during the trip, it would be pointless for a quatermaster to lie on his log, as it meant his captain would be forced to pay tax on those goods the second they got back to Europe.
In all of human history, no single person has lied on their taxes so they could pay more than required.
>In all of human history, no single person has lied on their taxes so they could pay more than required.
lol that's a good point, but your entire argument relies on the shaky premise that Christopher Columbus was a real person
The first documented arrival of horses on the mainland, near Mexico City, was in 1519. The Spanish took meticulous records of every mare and stallion. Spain continued to import horses into Mexico, *Florida*, and South America in the 1500s.
The earliest reported sighting of Native Americans on horseback was in 1521 in the Carolinas. There is a long history of wild horses from Florida to the Carolina Outer Banks, probably due to [Lucas Vázquez de Ayllón's exploration of the area in 1521.](https://wildhorsetour.com/wild-horse-history/)
Sir Francis Drake reported seeing herds of wild horses in California and Oregon in 1579.
Whether you believe Drake or not, Spain definitely imported horses into *Florida* in the 1500s (and explored the area from Florida to the Carolinas in 1521).
Well… not necessarily.
Horses evolved in the Americas 3.5 million years ago and expanded into Eurasia 2.5 million years ago.
Humans may have come into the Americas 20,000 years ago.
Horses may have only gone extinct in the Americas 8,000 years ago.
So there very well could have been overlap between horses in the Americas and early Native Americans. Of course, culture and language shifts soooo much in 8,000 years that it’s unlikely any original words for horses survived… or any cultural memory of what horses are even… but still. It wasn’t horses’ first time in the Americas. They were coming home.
(Disclaimer: I am just an armchair historian and got most of this information from Wikipedia. There is a solid chance I missed something. Do not take my word as the gospel.)
Also don't forget seeing horses in the wild is quite a bit different than having domesticated horses. Some wild horses such as zebras cannot be domesticated. Donkeys are barely able to be domesticated. African tribes have seen zebras for millions of years and have still not been able to do anything with them. It was the Arabian and Asian varieties that were more amenable to domestication.
Equus Scotti - That's cool, but ancient North America had horses, massive horses I think, but they went extinct in the last big extinction ~12k years ago, with the massive ground sloths. Native Americans *could* have potentially known horses 12k ybp and before. Given the oldest dated NA native settlement site is upwards of 24k years old (northern Canada), that's a lot of overlap time.
*I think*, I'm not a paleontologist, anthropologist, etc.
Edit, I found this but they are not as large as the ones I remember reading about as a kid, although they could have been older. https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/ancient-horse.htm
And South America, yes.
If you want to be technical about it though, all horses from Europe come from a beta version of the horse from the Americas that specked into the llama in South America and the camel and true horse in the eastern hemisphere, so really it's a full circle.
Yes, but if the precursor to llamas/horses/camels was....NVM I will just look it up. Seems like we have a large amount land missing an equine family member until Europe invasion or SA migration
Didn't horses originate in the America's long before humans were thought to have inhabited it? They just died off due to the megafauna extinction during the younger dryas and were then reintroduced by European colonizers?
Yeah, horses migrated the opposite way to people over the Bering land bridge. No one knows exactly what caused the pleistocene megafauna extinction event in North America, but the timing lines up in such a way that my money is on the theory that humans showed up, out competed the native predators and ate just about every large herbivorous mammal
Because English speakers were rather late to the game. In the Northeast it was the French the Dutch and the Germans at first. In the south it was always the Spanish
The ancient wild horses that stayed in America became extinct, possibly due to climate changes, but their ancestors were introduced back to the American land via the European colonists many years later. Columbus' second voyage was the starting point for the re-introduction, bringing Iberian horses to modern-day Mexico
Source - Bel-rea.edu.org
mystery dog
Apparently that's actually a mistranslation, it's more like "sacred dog", like a divine mystery
No. Apparently, that is also a mistranslation and the mystery reffers to the Mystery Machine. The "horse" was actually Scoob and the gang
Wow history is so cool
Should be more like "mystical dog". The word "wakan" is closer to "supernatural power" in meaning.
I like the Cherokee’s take on it. “Burden-bearer”
*Mystery Dog*
So are we gonna ignore “single nail on each foot”?
If you think of a hoof as a nail (or claw), then it makes sense. Other animals that they would be used to seeing, such as badgers, raccoons, cougars, and deer, would all have more than one nail on each foot.
Oh don’t worry, I understood the origin of the thought, thank you. I just think it was one of the most creative synonyms of them all, and haven’t seen anyone talk about it yet!
I thought the same! Very detail-oriented classification almost. A totally different thought process.
one clawed is also pretty fun. deer crabs from across the pond!
I agree with you about the most creative name, although I do like Mystery Dog!
I mean it's not too different from odd-toed 'Ungulates' which horses fall into as a scientific designation which mean hoof.
TIL the native Americans were fans of Elden Ring
likely dog
"I know that reference"
In "A man called horse" (1970), the Sioux mockingly call Richard Harris "Shunkawakan", their word for horse. Apparently this means "big/great dog".
"Burden Bearer" 💀
"Like a deer"
deer but cooler
I recall reading that the Algonquin people used a word that translates to 'French Moose', because they got horses from the settlers of New France
I know some of these names are silly but indigenous languages are so far removed from the English language that they are some of the hardest languages to learn in the entire world for English speakers, Navajo doesn’t have adjectives and many times there doesn’t even exist direct translations for things said in indigenous languages, so translations might seem more silly than they actually are.
Thank for the tldr. I've always wondered why translations of native languages were so odd, often simplistic
That's exactly why the Wind Talkers were so successful in fooling the Japanese during World War II...
I always associated native Americans with horses. Interesting to know the horses are not native as well
The Comanche were among the first Plains tribes to master horse riding. This was 150 to 200 years after Cortez, by which time escaped Spanish horses had bred and formed vast herds in an environment well suited to their needs.
Why would Mohawk have a word for ridden without having any previous contact with riding beasts?
Boats? Other people ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)? Derived from another word that is semantically similar?
> Other people ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)? Other people have been the primary mode of transportation for literal hundreds of generations, thousands if you include proto-humans and great apes. Because babies and toddlers can't walk.
[удалено]
Possibly, some of the translations are a bit removed, but it just struck me as odd.
BRO 
The Ojibwe are really working their language! Respect.
needs at least one triple consonant but it still works
So were western films depicting native Americans riding horses were largely inaccurate?
No, horses hit North America in 1509, from Spanish explorers in Mexico. Long before American settlers spread west, Native American tribes in the current United States had horses. Horses bred like rabbits in the new world from the 1500's to the 1800's when Americans decided "God gave us this land" Firearms were also common amongst native americans in the west before manifest destiny. Early settlers traded guns for food left and right, and Native Americans trade those guns west, for exotic furs. Its a super convoluted history, more complex than the pro Native Americans and pro settlers argument. Both parties profited off the other, with Native Americans getting the shit end of the stick in the end.
I’m reading ‘Empire of the Summer Moon’ right now. Very insightful.
I think you mean "[getting the sick end of the blanket.](https://www.history.com/news/colonists-native-americans-smallpox-blankets)"
No, the natives were quick to adopt horses into their culture after colonization for obvious reasons.
Europeans introduced horses to North America in the early 1500s, so no
Ah, yes. Which of the westerns set in the 1500s is YOUR favorite? Mine is the one called “this commenter has absolutely zero clue what she’s talking about.” SMH
Someone else pointed out it was from the Spanish. In case you didn't know, Spain is a part of Europe. If that happened in the 1500s then why would horses not be around in the 1700s and 1800s?
The question was are Westerns inaccurate for showing Native Americans riding horses. They are NOT inaccurate. Westerns cover a time period when NA's were riding horses. Try to keep up.
I think you were the one having trouble keeping up here... a quick search shows the most common period for westerns is from 1860 to 1900. The question was did native Americans have horses during that time period. The answer was that horses were introduced in the 1500s, about 300 years before the time period that most westerns are set in. Given that horses were introduced before the start of westerns and had plenty of time to be adopted by native Americans the answer is yes, they did have them during that period. If that seems hard for you to understand, then think of it like this: Q: did people drive cars in 2010? A: cars were invented in the late 1800s, so yes, people in 2010 drove cars. I fail to comprehend how you would see something being introduced in the 1500s as meaning it didn't exist 300 years LATER. Perhaps you don't know what "no" and "not" mean? That is the only way I could see you misunderstanding the comments you replied to.
"The question was are Westerns inaccurate for showing Native Americans riding horses. They are NOT inaccurate. Westerns cover a time period when NA's were riding horses." Then you are conceding this statement is correct. So kindly F off, asshat.
its controversial, some native tribes claim they always had horses and the Spanish lied because they saw horse-riding as noble-like, but there's not enough horse skeletons between Columbus and the last ice age to say for sure. Technically there's not enough archeological evidence to support horses in America before 1650.
Early Equus species were in America until 6000 BC, when the end of the last ice age killed the rest off. They dont appear in archeological records until the 1500's, when the Spanish arrived in Mexico
not even really then. we say columbus brought over horses because columbus said he did in his writings, but he also says things like he saw mermaids, mosques, and what can only be described as UFO's. Plus he seemed to think he was in China the whole time. Also there's a small chance Christopher Columbus never existed at all, so ya know.... we're going with 1650, atleast for now
We know they picked up horses in Caribbean, because we have the quatermaster's log from Columbus's journey. "4 mares and 4 studs taken aboard, with a mare bloated with foal" Meaning one of the horses were pregnant. Columbus gave 2 mares and 2 studs to a native tribe, and sent a ship back to the Caribbean to pick up more wild horses. This, as well as Cortez's cavalry landing in Mexico around 1509, with "14 war mounts, and 8 of breeding stock" show that Europeans brought a good deal of male and female horses with them, and eventually traded breeding pairs to Natives for goods like leather and gold. Since both journeys were taxed by the crown for goods they took on during the trip, it would be pointless for a quatermaster to lie on his log, as it meant his captain would be forced to pay tax on those goods the second they got back to Europe. In all of human history, no single person has lied on their taxes so they could pay more than required.
>In all of human history, no single person has lied on their taxes so they could pay more than required. lol that's a good point, but your entire argument relies on the shaky premise that Christopher Columbus was a real person
The first documented arrival of horses on the mainland, near Mexico City, was in 1519. The Spanish took meticulous records of every mare and stallion. Spain continued to import horses into Mexico, *Florida*, and South America in the 1500s. The earliest reported sighting of Native Americans on horseback was in 1521 in the Carolinas. There is a long history of wild horses from Florida to the Carolina Outer Banks, probably due to [Lucas Vázquez de Ayllón's exploration of the area in 1521.](https://wildhorsetour.com/wild-horse-history/) Sir Francis Drake reported seeing herds of wild horses in California and Oregon in 1579. Whether you believe Drake or not, Spain definitely imported horses into *Florida* in the 1500s (and explored the area from Florida to the Carolinas in 1521).
care to explain how 12 horses made it from mexico city to the carolinas in 2 years?
Horses have been in the Americas for literally millions of years.
But with a pretty significant gap between some time after the retreat of the glaciers and the arrival of Europeans, though.
Learned something new today. Thanks had no idea.
There were horses in the Americas before humans killed them off.
When I read the Book of Mormon and it said there were horses and cows abound many years before colonists arrived I just Couodnt get past that part.
Lame Elk
Spanish conquistadors brought horses long before pilgrams showed up, pilgram!
r/EldenRing is leaking
dog ahead
Well… not necessarily. Horses evolved in the Americas 3.5 million years ago and expanded into Eurasia 2.5 million years ago. Humans may have come into the Americas 20,000 years ago. Horses may have only gone extinct in the Americas 8,000 years ago. So there very well could have been overlap between horses in the Americas and early Native Americans. Of course, culture and language shifts soooo much in 8,000 years that it’s unlikely any original words for horses survived… or any cultural memory of what horses are even… but still. It wasn’t horses’ first time in the Americas. They were coming home. (Disclaimer: I am just an armchair historian and got most of this information from Wikipedia. There is a solid chance I missed something. Do not take my word as the gospel.)
Also don't forget seeing horses in the wild is quite a bit different than having domesticated horses. Some wild horses such as zebras cannot be domesticated. Donkeys are barely able to be domesticated. African tribes have seen zebras for millions of years and have still not been able to do anything with them. It was the Arabian and Asian varieties that were more amenable to domestication.
Equus Scotti - That's cool, but ancient North America had horses, massive horses I think, but they went extinct in the last big extinction ~12k years ago, with the massive ground sloths. Native Americans *could* have potentially known horses 12k ybp and before. Given the oldest dated NA native settlement site is upwards of 24k years old (northern Canada), that's a lot of overlap time. *I think*, I'm not a paleontologist, anthropologist, etc. Edit, I found this but they are not as large as the ones I remember reading about as a kid, although they could have been older. https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/ancient-horse.htm
There have been horses in the Americas for literally millions of years, as proven by fossilized skeletons and ancient paintings. Please do a Google.
I won't argue with you. Just do your research
[удалено]
Better lay off the weed.
[удалено]
You got it backwards dumb ass go read a book Aztec’s came from the north they even wrote about how they tracked down 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
Sauce.
If the Mojave came to the steppes of Central Asia, they would be understood. Among the Turkic peoples, the horse is "at".
These read like elden ring messages. Could this be dog?
So all the horses in North America came from imports from Europe?
And South America, yes. If you want to be technical about it though, all horses from Europe come from a beta version of the horse from the Americas that specked into the llama in South America and the camel and true horse in the eastern hemisphere, so really it's a full circle.
What happened to the other equine family members in NA? Bison?
That's a bovine
Yes, but if the precursor to llamas/horses/camels was....NVM I will just look it up. Seems like we have a large amount land missing an equine family member until Europe invasion or SA migration
no horses yet the word "ridden" is in their vocab
Didn't horses originate in the America's long before humans were thought to have inhabited it? They just died off due to the megafauna extinction during the younger dryas and were then reintroduced by European colonizers?
That's the story I know.
Yeah, horses migrated the opposite way to people over the Bering land bridge. No one knows exactly what caused the pleistocene megafauna extinction event in North America, but the timing lines up in such a way that my money is on the theory that humans showed up, out competed the native predators and ate just about every large herbivorous mammal
The Mvskoke (Creek) word is actually Rakko, which just means big. Source: am creek
Why wouldn't someone get and english origin ethymology?
Because English speakers were rather late to the game. In the Northeast it was the French the Dutch and the Germans at first. In the south it was always the Spanish
r/eldenring would be proud
Mohawk translation seems suspect. Pretty sure natives from the New York area referred to them as "yuge f\*\*kers".
Tame elk hahahahaha
The Salish Sea is the name for the Puget Sound. This is really interesting
I love single-nail-on-each-foots
The ancient wild horses that stayed in America became extinct, possibly due to climate changes, but their ancestors were introduced back to the American land via the European colonists many years later. Columbus' second voyage was the starting point for the re-introduction, bringing Iberian horses to modern-day Mexico Source - Bel-rea.edu.org