Jump to content
clarkgoble

Horses in the Book of Mormon

Recommended Posts

I wonder why the Spaniards were in the habit of spending resources to bring horses to the Americas and then release them willy-nilly into whatever landscape was available. Horses were a weapon. One keeps close contact with ones weapon. Otherwise the enemy can get hold of it and use it against you, especially one that has been already broke and trained. Sure some might escape or be chased off by the natives. Jaguars would likely find them delicious. Does anyone know of Spanish chronicles that speak of how their  horses faired in the Americas?  

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, PacMan said:

Sorry, no.  The argument is that the BoM is false because it mentions horses, which critics argue did not exist during BoM times.  This is the critics' argument (not mine), so they bear the burden of proof.  As I've shown, they cannot conclude that horses did not exist in Americas during BoM due to the Curly horse, which, at best (for them), science cannot conclude where they came from.

Now, if my argument were that the BoM was true because horses existed pre-Columbian, then I would hold that burden of proof.  But I wouldn't make such a stupid argument in the first place because the veracity of the BoM has virtually nothing to do with horses, whatsoever.

The problem here is you keep claiming that it is "the critic argument" that horses did not exist during BoM times, and while this may be exactly what some critics are saying, it is also exactly what pretty much the scientific consensus is also saying. This isn't "the critics' argument as you are trying to paint it. It is everybody's belief (outside of a LDS belief) that there were none. 

 

I wonder what reaction you would get from a Meso-american anthropologist when you told him that since Curly horses were there in the early 1800's that must mean they were there all along, even though there is no physical evidence for them before Columbus, especially after you told him they were a known breed in Europe?

Edited by CA Steve

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

I wonder why the Spaniards were in the habit of spending resources to bring horses to the Americas and then release them willy-nilly into whatever landscape was available. Horses were a weapon. One keeps close contact with ones weapon. Otherwise the enemy can get hold of it and use it against you, especially one that has been already broke and trained. Sure some might escape or be chased off by the natives. Jaguars would likely find them delicious. Does anyone know of Spanish chronicles that speak of how their  horses faired in the Americas?  

Pretty much everywhere horses have been introduced, wild herds have developed from horses that escaped or were driven off by natives. 

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, CA Steve said:

The problem here is you keep claiming that it is "the critic argument" that horses did not exist during BoM times, and while this may be exactly what some critics are saying, it is also exactly what pretty much the scientific consensus is also saying. This isn't "the critics' argument as you are trying to paint it. It is everybody's belief (outside of a LDS belief) that there were none. 

 

I wonder what reaction you would get from a Meso-american anthropologist when you told him that since Curly horses were there in the early 1800's that must mean they were there all along, even though there is no physical evidence for them before Columbus, especially after you told him they were a known breed in Europe?

CA Steve, ummm....this is an LDS apologetics site.  Whether one person is saying it or millions, the fact is that it is adopted by critics of the BoM.  Consequently, your first paragraph is a complete non sequitur.

I'd also invite you to go back and read my prior comments.  And CFR that the Curly was a "known breed in Europe."  In fact, there's an account then when the Curly was found in Austria, it was quite a find.  This isn't the Spanish Colonial (Mustang).  We are talking of the Curly. 

Again, we know the Curly was throughout North and South America in the early 1800s.  We also know that modern horses match the genetic disposition of ancient American horses.  So whether they are critics of the BoM or the uncited and anonymous scientific consensus you ref to, that horses were not natively in the Americas is an assumption -- not scientific consensus.  And that assumption has very serious problems.

In the end, the critics fail their burden of proof.  They can't answer where the Curly came from.  Consequently, they can't conclude that it was not native.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, strappinglad said:

I wonder why the Spaniards were in the habit of spending resources to bring horses to the Americas and then release them willy-nilly into whatever landscape was available. Horses were a weapon. One keeps close contact with ones weapon. Otherwise the enemy can get hold of it and use it against you, especially one that has been already broke and trained. Sure some might escape or be chased off by the natives. Jaguars would likely find them delicious. Does anyone know of Spanish chronicles that speak of how their  horses faired in the Americas?  

There are some early records of horses brought on ships. The earliest imports were virtually all male - very few mares - the Spanish used stallions and geldings for war horses. They also recorded how many horse survived. One record says the handful of horses left were not taken back but left on the shore, and the Spaniards watched as the Natives descended upon the horses and slaughtered them. There is little doubt in my mind that the horse were extinct in Mesoamerica at that time - probably for 2000 years at least. The Maya depicted all kinds of animals, but never depicted the horse. However, the Spanish continued to bring horses in the 1500s, and some did escape. Jaguars are a forest animal. Horse are largely a tundra animal. Spanish horses faired well, but we have to remember that Natives suffered something like a 90% drop in their numbers from smallpox and other diseases, so hunting pressure on horse would have been far less.

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/10/2018 at 8:41 PM, Physics Guy said:

For native Americans to call horses "deer" would be entirely different: it would make sense. Pre-Columbian Americans didn't have anything like horses, so a deer might well have been the closest familiar animal they knew.

 

As a descendant of California Indians (Konkow-Maidu tribe) I can confirm that that the word for "deer" is exactly what some of my ancestors used to refer to horses and cows.  The word was "su-mi", fwiw.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/3/2018 at 10:08 AM, clarkgoble said:

Horses in the Book of Mormon

 

I've always found this video to be good.

Hard Evidence of Horses in America

 

Share this post


Link to post

Perhaps some details for those of us who dislike videos?

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×