A History of Inventions, Discoveries, and Origins, Volume 1 (of 2)

by Johann Beckmann

Arrian also reckons these soles or shoes among the riding-furniture of an ass[1384]. Xenophon relates that certain people of Asia were accustomed, when the snow lay deep on the ground, to draw socks over the feet of their horses, as they would otherwise, he adds, have sunk up to the bellies in the snow[1385]. I cannot comprehend how their sinking among the snow could, by such means, have been prevented; and I am inclined rather to believe, that their feet were covered in that manner in order to save them from being wounded. The Russians, in some parts, such as Kamtschatka, employ the same method in regard to the dogs which draw their sledges, or catch seals on the ice. They are furnished with shoes which are bound round their feet, and which are so ingeniously made that their claws project through small holes[1386].

The shoes of the Roman cattle must have been very ill fastened, as they were so readily lost in stiff clay[1387]; and it appears that they were not used during a whole journey, but were put on either in miry places, or at times when pomp or the safety of the cattle required it; for we are informed by Suetonius, that the coachman of Vespasian once stopped on the road to put on the shoes of his mules[1388].

The reason why mention of these shoes on horses occurs so seldom, undoubtedly is, because, at the time when the before-quoted authors wrote, mules and asses were more employed than horses, as has been already remarked by Scheffer and others. Artemidorus speaks of a shod horse, and makes use of the same expression employed in regard to other cattle[1389]. Winkelmann has described a cut stone in the collection of Baron Stosch[1390], on which is represented the figure of a man holding up one foot of a horse, while another, kneeling, is employed in fastening on a shoe. These are all the proofs of horses being shod among the ancients with which I am acquainted. That they were never shod in war, or at any rate, that these socks were not sufficient to defend the hoof from injury, seems evident from the testimony of various authors. When Mithridates was besieging Cyzicus, he was obliged to send his cavalry to Bithynia, because the hoofs of the horses were entirely spoiled and worn out[1391]. In the Latin translation it is added that this was occasioned by the horses not having shoes; but there are no such words in the original, which seems rather to afford a strong proof that in the army of Mithridates there was nothing of the kind. The case seems to have been the same in the army of Alexander; for we are told by Diodorus Siculus, that with uninterrupted marching the hoofs of his horses were totally broken and destroyed[1392]. An instance of the like kind is to be found in Cinnamus, where the cavalry were obliged to be left behind, as they had suffered considerably in the hoofs; an evil, says the historian, to which horses are often liable[1393].

From what has been said I think I may venture to draw this conclusion, that the ancient Greek and Roman cavalry had not always, or in common, a covering for the hoofs of their horses, and that they were not acquainted with shoes like those used at present, which are nailed on. In the remains of ancient sculpture, among the ruins of Persepolis[1394], on Trajan’s pillar, those of Antoninus, Marcus Aurelius, and many others, no representation of them is to be found; and one can never suppose that the artists designedly omitted them, as they have imitated with the utmost minuteness the shoes of the soldiers, and the nails which fasten on the iron that surrounds the wheels of carriages. The objection that the artists have not represented the shoes then in use, and that for the same reason they might have omitted shoes such as ours though common, is of no weight; for the former were used only very seldom; they were not given to every horse, and when they were drawn over the hoof and made fast, they had an awkward appearance, which would not have been the case with iron shoes like those of the moderns. A basso-relievo, it is true, may still be seen in the Mattei palace at Rome, on which is represented a hunting-match of Gallienus, and where one of the horses has a real iron shoe on one of his feet. From this circumstance Fabretti[1395] infers that the use of horse-shoes is of the same antiquity as that piece of sculpture; but Winkelmann has remarked, that this foot is not ancient, and that it has been added by a modern artist[1396].

I will readily allow that proofs drawn from an object not being mentioned in the writings of the ancients are of no great importance, and that they may be even very often false. I am however of opinion, whatever may be said to the contrary, that Polybius, Xenophon in his book on riding and horsemanship, Julius Pollux in his Dictionary where he mentions fully everything that relates to horse-furniture and riding-equipage, and the authors who treat on husbandry and the veterinary art, could not possibly have omitted to take notice of horse-shoes, had they been known at those periods when they wrote. Can we suppose that writers would be silent respecting the shoeing of horses, had it been practised, when they speak so circumstantially of the breeding and rearing of these animals, and prescribe remedies for the diseases and accidents to which they are liable? On account of the danger which arises from horses being badly shod, the treatment of all those disorders to which they are incident has been committed to farriers; and is it in the least probable that this part of their employment should have been entirely forgotten by Vegetius and the rest of the ancients, who studied the nature and maladies of cattle? They indeed speak seldom, and not very expressly, of the ancient shoes put on horses; but this is not to be wondered at, as they had little occasion to mention them, because they gave rise to no particular infirmity. Where they could be of utility, they have recommended them, which plainly shows that the use of them was not then common. Gesner remarks very properly, that Lycinus, in Lucian, who was unacquainted with riding, when enumerating the many dangers to which he might be exposed by mounting on horseback, speaks only of being trod under the feet of the cavalry, without making any mention of the injury to be apprehended from iron shoes. To be sensible, however, of the full force of this argument, one must read the whole passage[1397]. Many of the ancient historians also, when they speak of armies, give an account of all those persons who were most necessary in them, and of the duties which they performed; but farriers are not even mentioned. When it was necessary for the horses to have shoes, each rider put them upon his own; no persons in particular were requisite for that service; but had shoes, such as those of the moderns, been then in use, the assistance of farriers would have been indispensable.

As our horse-shoes were unknown to the ancients, they employed the utmost care to procure horses with strong hoofs[1398], and for the same reason they tried every method possible to harden the hoofs and to render them more durable. Precepts for this purpose may be found in Xenophon[1399], Vegetius[1400], and other authors. It indeed appears wonderful to us, that the use of iron shoes should have remained so long unknown; but it was certainly a bold attempt to nail a piece of iron, for the first time, under the foot of a horse; and I firmly believe that there are many persons at present, who, had they never seen such a thing, would doubt the possibility of it if they heard it mentioned. Horse-shoes, however, are not absolutely necessary; horses in many countries are scarce, and in some they are not shod even at present. This is still the case in Ethiopia, in Japan, and in Tartary[1401]. In Japan, shoes, such as those of the ancients, are used. Iron shoes are less necessary in places where the ground is soft and free from stones; and it appears to me very probable, that the practice of shoeing became more common as the paving of streets was increased. There were paved highways indeed at a very early period, but they were a long time scarce, and were to be found only in opulent countries. But when roads covered with gravel were almost everywhere constructed, the hoofs of the horses would have soon been destroyed without iron shoes, and the preservatives before employed would have been of very little service.

However strong I consider these proofs, which show that the ancients did not give their horses shoes such as ours, I think it my duty to mention and examine those grounds from which men of learning and ingenuity have affirmed the contrary. Vossius lays great stress, in particular, upon a passage of Xenophon, who, as he thinks, recommends the preservation of the hoofs by means of iron. Gesner, however, has explained the words used by that author so clearly as to leave no doubt that Vossius judged too rashly. Xenophon[1402] only gives directions to harden the hoofs of a horse, and to make them stronger and more durable; which is to be done, he says, by causing him to walk and to stamp with his feet in a place covered with stones. He describes the stones proper for this purpose; and that they may be retained in their position, he advises that they should be bound down with cramps of iron. The word which Vossius refers to the hoofs, alludes without doubt to the stones which were to be kept together by the above means. Xenophon, in another work, repeats the same advice[1403], and says that experience will soon show how much the hoofs will be strengthened by this operation.

Vossius considers also as an argument in his favour the expressions used by Homer and other poets when they speak of iron-footed and brazen-footed horses, loud-sounding hoofs, &c., and is of opinion that such epithets could be applied only to horses that had iron shoes. But if we recollect that hard and strong hoofs were among the properties of a good horse, we shall find that these expressions are perfectly intelligible without calling in the assistance of modern horse-shoes. Xenophon employs the like comparisons free from poetical ornament, and explains them in a manner sufficiently clear. The hoofs, says he, must be so hard, that when the horse strikes the ground, they may resound like a cymbal. Eustathius, the scholiast of Aristophanes, and Hesychius, have also explained these expressions as alluding to the hardness and solidity of the hoofs. Of the same kind is the equus sonipes of the Roman poet[1404]; and the stags and oxen with metal feet[1405], mentioned in fabulous history, which undoubtedly were not shod. Epithets of the like nature were applied by the poets to persons who had a strong voice[1406].

Le Beau quotes a passage of Tryphiodorus, which on the first view seems to allude to a real horse-shoe. This author, where he speaks of the construction of the Trojan horse, says that the artist did not forget the metal or iron on the hoofs[1407]. But supposing it true that the author here meant real shoes, this would be no proof of their being known at the time of the Trojan war, and we could only be authorised to allow them the same antiquity as the period when the poet wrote. That however is not known. According to the most probable conjectures, it was between the reign of Severus and that of Anastasius, or between the beginning of the third and the sixth century. Besides, the whole account may be understood as alluding to the ancient shoes. At any rate, it ought to be explained in this manner till it be proved by undisputed authorities that shoes, such as those of the moderns, were used in the time of the above poet.

Vossius asserts that he had in his possession a Greek manuscript on the veterinary art, in which there were some figures, where the nails under the feet of the horses could be plainly distinguished. But we are ignorant whether the manuscript or the figures still exist, nor is the antiquity of either of them known. It is probable that shoes were given to the horses by a modern transcriber, in the same manner as another put a pen into the hand of Aristotle.