Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T13:34:25.416Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Understanding early horse transport in eastern Eurasia through analysis of equine dentition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 September 2021

William T.T. Taylor*
Affiliation:
University of Colorado Boulder Museum of Natural History, USA
Jinping Cao
Affiliation:
Center for the Study of Ancient Civilization, Henan University, P.R. China
Wenquan Fan
Affiliation:
Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology, P.R. China
Xiaolin Ma
Affiliation:
Henan Museum, P.R. China
Yanfeng Hou
Affiliation:
Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology, P.R. China
Juan Wang
Affiliation:
Department for the History of Science and Scientific Archaeology, University of Science and Technology of China, P.R. China
Yue Li
Affiliation:
School of Cultural Heritage & Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Cultural Heritage Studies and Conservation, Northwest University, P.R. China
Chengrui Zhang
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, Harvard University, USA
Helena Miton
Affiliation:
Santa Fe Institute, USA
Igor Chechushkov
Affiliation:
South Ural State University (National Research University), Chelyabinsk, Russia
Jamsranjav Bayarsaikhan
Affiliation:
National Museum of Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
Robert Cook
Affiliation:
Tufts University, USA
Emily L. Jones
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, USA
Enkhbayar Mijiddorj
Affiliation:
Ulaanbaatar University, Mongolia
Tserendorj Odbaatar
Affiliation:
National Museum of Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
Chinbold Bayandelger
Affiliation:
National Museum of Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
Barbara Morrison
Affiliation:
Morrison Designs, Missoula, USA
Bryan Miller
Affiliation:
History of Art Department & Museum of Anthropological Archaeology, University of Michigan, USA
*
*Author for correspondence ✉ [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Across Eurasia, horse transport transformed ancient societies. Although evidence for chariotry is well dated, the origins of horse riding are less clear. Techniques to distinguish chariotry from riding in archaeological samples rely on elements not typically recovered from many steppe contexts. Here, the authors examine horse remains of Mongolia's Deer Stone-Khirigsuur (DSK) Complex, comparing them with ancient and modern East Asian horses used for both types of transport. DSK horses demonstrate unique dentition damage that could result from steppe chariotry, but may also indicate riding with a shallow rein angle at a fast gait. A key role for chariots in Late Bronze Age Mongolia helps explain the trajectory of horse use in early East Asia.

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.

Introduction

Domestic horses (Equus caballus) facilitated the emergence of highly mobile pastoral lifeways and the transcontinental equestrian empires of the steppes of Mongolia and eastern Eurasia. Although historical documents trace horse riding in East Asia only as far back as the mid-first millennium BC (Cooke Reference Cooke2000), widespread archaeological evidence in the region dates back centuries earlier, to the late second millennium BC (Fitzhugh Reference Fitzhugh and Bemmann2009). This was a period of major horse-related transformations in East Asia, including greater mobility of pastoral herders, the exploitation of horses for meat and milk and the dispersal of domestic horses into Central China (Yuan & Flad Reference Yuan, Flad and Mashkour2006; Taylor et al. Reference Taylor2020; Wilkin et al. Reference Wilkin2020). The available data make it difficult to assess whether these developments were linked to the innovation or adoption of mounted horseback riding, or to the initial dispersal of domestic horses into the region (Taylor et al. Reference Taylor2017).

We present unique damage patterns in early domestic horse remains from Mongolia, and suggest that early horse transport in the Eastern Steppe entailed fast gaits and shallow rein angles, along with a high frequency of ‘bit-grasping’ that would have hampered control by riders. Our findings imply that late second-millennium BC riding—if practised—probably entailed high risk to the rider. This may explain the preference for chariot transport and the apparent absence of mounted riding beyond the steppe in China and other parts of East Asia until the mid-first millennium, when advances in horse tack improved rider control.

The cart before the horse?

Recent arguments for the origins of horse domestication have centred on Botai sites in northern Kazakhstan dated to c. 3500 BC. These sites have yielded overwhelming quantities of equid remains, with some Equus przewalskii specimens exhibiting apparent damage to the dentition linked to the use of a bridle mouthpiece, or ‘bit’ (Outram et al. Reference Outram2009; Gaunitz et al. Reference Gaunitz2018). The earliest definitively domestic horses, however, are associated with the southern Trans-Uralian Sintashta Culture, dated to c. 2000 BC (Fages et al. Reference Fages2019). Sintashta horses are found in paired burials and are sometimes accompanied by chariot wheel remains and bridle components (Chechushkov & Epimakhov Reference Chechushkov and Epimakhov2018). Historical records and archaeological finds from the late second millennium BC reveal the proliferation of chariots across much of western Eurasia and North Africa, with only sparse reference to horse riding (Littauer & Crouwel Reference Littauer and Crouwel1979). Ridden horses only appear in western Eurasian historical records in the early first millennium BC (Littauer & Crouwel Reference Littauer and Crouwel1979). Nonetheless, many scholars (e.g. Littauer et al. Reference Littauer, Crouwel and Raulwing2002; Olsen Reference Olsen, Olsen, Grant, Choyke and Bartosiewicz2006a; Anthony Reference Anthony2007) believe that mounted horseback riding must have occurred long before this time in the steppes, where historical records are rare or absent and horse equipment is scarce.

Understanding early horse transport in East Asia

The chronology of chariotry and mounted riding is crucial to understanding pastoral prehistory in Mongolia, where horses historically underpinned highly mobile herding economies and one of the world's oldest ‘horse cultures’. Recent research suggests that the tending of pastoral livestock and dairy production using sheep, cattle and goats dates as far back as c. 3000 BC in the Eastern Steppes (Kovalev & Erdenebaatar Reference Kovalev, Erdenebaatar and Bemmann2009; Wilkin et al. Reference Wilkin2020). The earliest domestic horses so far identified in Mongolia, however, belong to the Bronze Age Deer Stone-Khirigsuur Complex (DSK), which emerged towards the end of the second millennium BC. This culture is named for its ritual standing stones (deer stones) and burial mounds (khirigsuurs) that are often surrounded by multiple horse burial features (Fitzhugh Reference Fitzhugh and Bemmann2009). DSK sites have yielded evidence for the ritual sacrifice and dietary exploitation of horses (Fitzhugh Reference Fitzhugh and Bemmann2009), while skeletal changes indicate that DSK horses were bridled and heavily exerted, and received sophisticated veterinary care (Taylor et al. Reference Taylor, Bayarsaikhan and Tuvshinjargal2015, Reference Taylor2018). The co-occurrence of the first DSK horses with the appearance of domestic horses at late Shang Dynasty sites in China suggests that these two processes were linked (Honeychurch Reference Honeychurch2015).

The role of horseback riding in DSK culture is less clear. Although we have previously hypothesised that mounted horseback riding may have stimulated the spread of DSK culture (Taylor & Tuvshinjargal Reference Taylor, Tuvshinjargal, Bartosiewicz and Gál2018), only chariots, not riders, are depicted on Mongolian deer stone carvings (Figure 1). Images of DSK horse-drawn vehicles depict a light, two-horse chariot with a platform situated over a central axle, with two animals under yoke (Figure 1: right) and, in one case, additional animals along the outside (Figure 1: middle). Archaeological discoveries from adjoining regions, such as trousers and horse burials from Xinjiang and horse skeletons exhibiting transport-related pathologies from Arzhan (to the north, in Tuva) (Benecke Reference Benecke2007; Wagner et al. Reference Wagner2011), suggest the emergence of horseback riding in the Altai region by the early first millennium BC. To date, however, the earliest unequivocal evidence for horseback riding in Mongolia comes from Pazyryk Culture burials in the western Altai Mountains (c. 400 BC), which have yielded horses equipped with pad saddles and elaborate regalia (Rudenko Reference Rudenko1970). Based on the current evidence, it is unclear how DSK horses were used for transport. Beyond the head, neck and hoof bones of sacrificed horses found at DSK sites, no other datasets are available to assess the use of horses in early East Asia.

Figure 1. Chariot images on central Mongolian Deer Stone-Khirigsuur Complex (DSK) monuments, including a two-horse (right) and a four-horse vehicle (middle); left) a typical DSK ritual head, neck and hoof burial (chariot drawings by W.T.T. Taylor modified after Volkov (Reference Volkov2002 [1981]: 93 & 218) and Nyambat and Odbaatar (Reference Nyambat and Odbaatar2010: 64)).

Horse transport and the equine skeleton

As our knowledge of the equine skeleton and its responses to human activity has expanded, new tools and approaches have emerged to reconstruct the use of horses in the past. Pioneering work by Clutton-Brock (Reference Clutton-Brock1974) and Anthony et al. (Reference Anthony, Telegin and Brown1991) revealed that bridle mouthpieces can cause recognisable damage to horse dentition in the form of uneven wear to the occlusal surface of the mandibular second premolar—otherwise known as ‘bit-wear’. Although bit-wear became a favoured tool to argue for early horse domestication, Olsen (Reference Olsen, Levine, Renfrew and Boyle2003) demonstrated that natural occlusion problems can also produce bevelling of the tooth surface in wild equids. Intentional modification of horse teeth through dentistry can also induce premolar bevelling (Cross Reference Cross, Bartosiewicz and Gál2018). Thus, individual teeth must be considered alongside opposing dentition when seeking to identify anthropogenic tooth modifications.

Several scholars (e.g. Bendrey Reference Bendrey2007; Cook Reference Cook2011; Taylor & Tuvshinjargal Reference Taylor, Tuvshinjargal, Bartosiewicz and Gál2018) have identified a suite of other changes to the dentition caused by bridle mouthpieces, including erosion of the anterior surface of the lower second premolar, bone spur development or bone loss along the diastema, chipping of the enamel and remodelling of the bone at the alveolar margin of the premolar, and even damage to the bones of the palate. These forms of damage are influenced by the type of bit and bridle used, the behaviour and technique of the horse and of the rider, the type and duration of activity performed, the shape of the horse's head and mouth and the age and sex of the horse (Bennett Reference Bennett, Baker and Easley2005; Manfredi et al. Reference Manfredi, Clayton and Rosenstein2005; Bendrey Reference Bendrey2007; Cook Reference Cook2011). This variability enables archaeologists to reconstruct important details about how horses were used, even in the absence of tack or other direct evidence.

Both riding and cart traction typically employ a bridle and bit. Hence, the presence of bit-wear alone cannot distinguish ridden horses from those used to pull carts (Dietz Reference Dietz, Renfrew and Levine2003), although other skeletal criteria can help differentiate these activities. Before the invention of the frame saddle in the first millennium BC, mounted horseback riding caused characteristic changes to the horse's lower back, which are typically more extensive/severe on the animal's left side (Levine et al. Reference Levine, Whitwell and Jeffcott2005; Li et al. Reference Li2020). In contrast, a sample of chariot horses from ancient China (Levine Reference Levine2005), along with early donkey/onager hybrids used in cart traction in the ancient Near East (Weber Reference Weber2008), shows higher pathological frequencies affecting the front shoulders and lower limbs, and less damage to the vertebrae. Schrader et al. (Reference Schrader, Smith, Olsen and Buzon2018) also report osseous changes, linked to chariotry, in the final cervical and first thoracic vertebrae, situated where the strain of a yoke is borne. Unfortunately, horse remains from DSK sites and many others from across the Eurasian Steppes comprise so-called ‘head and hoof’ features, either lacking neck vertebrae entirely or containing only the cervical vertebrae (Allard et al. Reference Allard, Popova, Hartley and Smith2007; Outram Reference Outram2011).

More commonly recovered from steppe archaeological contexts, horse crania may also yield useful osteological differences between chariotry and riding. The use of a bridle noseband often causes deformation of the nasal bones, which, in contemporary Mongolian horses, is biased towards the left side due to the predominance of left-handed reining (Taylor & Tuvshinjargal Reference Taylor, Tuvshinjargal, Bartosiewicz and Gál2018). Ossification of the nuchal ligament attachment site at the rear of the skull occurs in both ridden and driven animals—a feature that apparently reaches greater levels of ossification in ridden than in draught animals (Bendrey Reference Bendrey2008), and is generally absent in wild animals (Taylor et al. Reference Taylor, Bayarsaikhan and Tuvshinjargal2015). The degree of discrimination provided by these features in distinguishing transport types, however, remains unclear.

In summary, while chariotry and riding produce differential impacts on the equine skeleton—particularly the vertebral column—the most useful diagnostic differences often occur on skeletal elements not typically recovered from early domestic horse burials in Mongolia or elsewhere. To date, these approaches have therefore made little headway in clarifying the early trajectory of horse transport in prehistoric Central Asia. Here, we assess the possibility that damage patterns to the dentition, which frequently survive in the archaeological record, may help distinguish between prehistoric equine transport strategies.

Bit-wear, riding and chariotry

To assess whether meaningful osteological differences in dental wear may be found between chariot and riding horses, we analysed a sample of modern and ancient Chinese and Mongolian horses used for both types of transport. For each horse, we assigned a categorical score of 0–4 based on observed wear to the anterior and occlusal portions of both the upper and lower second premolars. A score of 0 represents no visible wear; 1 represents cementum abrasion but no enamel exposure; 2 corresponds to enamel exposure; 3 indicates visible erosion of exposed enamel; and 4 represents visible erosion of anterior enamel, paired with occlusal bevelling (see Anthony & Brown Reference Anthony and Brown1998). As we know that Bronze and Early Iron Age Mongolian horses were controlled using an organic (e.g. wood, leather, fibre, or bone) bit (Taylor et al. Reference Taylor, Tuvshinjargal and Bayarsaikhan2016), we did not attempt to distinguish ‘natural’ wear from ‘bit’ wear a priori based on the morphology of anterior enamel exposure (c.f. Bendrey Reference Bendrey2007). Examples of teeth in each of the four categories are provided in online supplementary material (OSM) 1.

Our results show that in East Asia, mounted riding differentially impacts the lower dentition compared with the upper. In a sample of 23 analysed riding horse specimens, more than half exhibit exposed enamel on the lower premolars, with 4 being the most commonly assigned score for lower dentition. In contrast, more than half of the same analysed group showed limited or no damage to the upper dentition, with the most common score in this group being 0. Among those riding specimens that display damage to the upper dentition, this is always paired with more severe damage or erosion to the lower premolars (Figure 2: left).

Figure 2. Bit-wear to the upper and lower premolars in two riding horses from Turkic (fifth to eighth centuries AD; NMM 011) (left) and Pazyryk (fourth century BC; NMM 013) (right). Images show the pairing of upper premolar wear with severe lower premolar wear (figure by W.T.T. Taylor).

In contrast, our sample of chariot horses from first-millennium BC Chinese archaeological contexts lacks the clear patterning of damage seen in the modern and archaeological riding assemblage, suggesting that chariotry could produce more evenly-spread bit damage across both the upper and lower dentition. A large number of chariot horses have been recovered from Eastern Zhou Dynasty (770–256 BC) sites in Xinzheng City, near modern Zhengzhou (see OSM1). All of these horses were adult males, and archaeological research indicates that, as with our modern/archaeological riding assemblage, horses of this period were typically controlled using a jointed bronze/iron snaffle bit (Figure 3) in tandem with rein-rings (Wu Reference Wu2013: 81). Most of the 42 Xinzheng horses, however, exhibit scores of 2 or less, and few show any signs of occlusal bevelling. The Xinzheng chariot horses, however, exhibit meaningful levels of enamel erosion in neither their upper nor lower dentition. This could imply that the horses’ role as property of the social elite did not entail intense activity. Age may also have had a minor effect on these patterns; in both samples, horses over 10 years of age have a higher average wear score (~3.2 and 2.2 in the riding and chariot groups, respectively) than those younger than 10 years (~2.3 and 1.5, respectively). Our sample of riding horses exhibits a slightly higher average estimated age (~10.4 years) than that of the Chinese chariot sample (~8.1 years). Together, these osteological comparisons of East Asian riding and chariot horses suggest that mounted riding may produce more damage to the lower jaw, although limited pathology in the Chinese sample and age differences between sample groups limit our confidence in this assertion.

Figure 3. Left) bit damage to both lower and upper premolars caused by the use of a metal bit while pulling a chariot, from the Eastern Zhou Dynasty site of Cuiyuanxiaoqu (photograph by J. Cao); right) bronze bit from tomb 62, Xincun site (modified by W.T.T. Taylor after Guo (Reference Guo1998: 61)).

Comparative data in hand, we carefully reanalysed all adult DSK horses at the National Museum of Mongolia that retain complete (upper and lower) dentition (n = 19) for evidence of incongruous wear to the upper premolars that, upon refitting with the opposing jaw, could not be explained by natural malocclusion. Although a previous study (Taylor et al. Reference Taylor, Tuvshinjargal and Bayarsaikhan2016) found no evidence of bit-wear on the lower premolars, our reanalysis shows that eight of 19 specimens display bevelling of the upper second premolars (Table S1), most of which exhibit uneven wearing of the enamel and cementum—a feature sometimes referred to as the “Greaves effect” and taken as a sign of natural wear (Olsen Reference Olsen, Zeder and Smith2006b). Two specimens in the sample, however, have worn upper second premolars with even wear of the enamel and cementum, which contrasts with the wear seen elsewhere in the dentition (Figure 4). This implies that a material of similar hardness to tooth enamel, such as a bone bit, was responsible for the wear. In one case, wear on the upper second premolar is so severe that it also affects the upper third premolar (Figure 4: lower left).

Figure 4. Abnormal wear to the upper premolars in Deer Stone-Khirigsuur horses: top) 14–15-year-old female (NMM 002); lower left) >16 year-old female (NMM 095); lower right) >16-year-old of indeterminate sex (NMM 001) (figure by W.T.T. Taylor).

Five of the 19 DSK specimens also display an unusual type of wear, first noticed by Bartosiewicz and Gal (Reference Bartosiewicz and Gal2013: 134) in early medieval horses from Hungary, wherein the intercuspid space between the first and second cusp of the second or third lower premolar develops a rounded, scooped shape that is attributed to firm grasping of the bit between the teeth (Figure 5). On these five specimens, the location of this intercuspid, lower premolar wear corresponds with wear observed on the upper premolars. In the horse from the site of Morin Mort that exhibits wear extending deep into the third premolar, intercuspid wear is also found on the lower second premolar (Figure 5). These patterns suggest a bit being lifted over the lower teeth and ground upwards into the upper premolars. One horse even exhibits polishing around the intercuspid space, and nowhere else, which appears to have been caused by the bit (Figure 5: top left). Three of the five DSK horse specimens with mandibular intercuspid wear also exhibit deformations of the alveolar margin, where it appears that downwards pressure in gripping the bit has caused the tooth to bow laterally outwards (Figure 5: lower right; see OSM2).

Figure 5. Intercuspid wear of the lower jaw in Deer Stone-Khirigsuur horses: top left) polishing of the occlusal surface of a lower right second premolar (~6–7-year-old male; NMM 008); top right) wear to the lower third premolar (>16-year-old female; NMM 095). Several instances of bulging deformation of the mandibular margin of the lateral alveolar exterior surface near the affected teeth (>20-year-old of indeterminate sex (NMM 051, lower left) and male, 6–7 years (NMM 008, lower right)) (figure by W.T.T. Taylor).

Our analysis of DSK horses reveals a high frequency of damage to the upper premolars, paired with an absence of classic forms of lower premolar damage, along with an unusual form of intercuspid wear of the second premolar and deformation of the alveolar margins of the lower premolar row. These patterns appear to have resulted from chronic gripping of a bridle mouthpiece or bit, which was ground against the upper premolars by the lower jaw as the horse took the ‘bit between the teeth’. The uneven nature of wear caused by DSK bits across enamel and cementum (e.g. Figure 4: lower left) suggests that soft organic materials—perhaps fibre or leather—were often used for mouthpiece construction. Other instances of upper premolar wear to both enamel and cementum in our analysed sample imply the use of a hard bit (perhaps bone, antler or even metal), similar to equipment recovered from later first-millennium BC contexts in Mongolia (Chan Reference Chan2018: 87).

Discussion

Rein angle

While comparison of modern and archaeological riding and chariot horse dentition suggests that concentrated damage to the lower premolars might be an archaeological correlate of mounted horseback riding, the patterns identified in our DSK sample—with damage focused on the upper dentition—are more difficult to interpret. This pattern has no correlates in our comparative assemblage, and implies a shallow, near-horizontal angle between the reins and the horse's head.

To aid in understanding the relationship between rein angle and transport activity, we compiled a database of 227 side-on profile images of horses engaged in various forms of transport using a search of publicly available images. We selected images of modern Mongolian horseback riding (n = 96), English-style horseback riding (n = 21), jockey horse racing (n = 30), harness racing (n = 30), agricultural ploughing (n = 11), pulling carriages (n = 22) and reconstructed ancient chariots produced by Spruytte (Reference Spruytte1983; n = 17). We excluded any images depicting the use of a curb or leverage bit, along with any image in which the horse was stationary or not receiving guidance via the reins. For each category, we noted the gait/speed of the horse (stop, walk, trot or canter/gallop). Using the open-source software ImageJ, we measured rein angle as the angle formed by the reins and the bridle's cheek strap (which runs from the poll to the bit; see OSM3).

Our results indicate that rein angles differ meaningfully across types of transport. Traction animals (chariots, carriages and ploughs) yield a relatively consistent set of rein angles between 54 and 58 degrees. Reconstructions of ancient chariots (Spruytte Reference Spruytte1983) average a rein angle of 54 degrees (Figure 6). In contrast, some styles of mounted horseback riding, such as English riding, entail consistently high rein angles of around 90 degrees. Others, including contemporary Mongolian horse riding or jockey racing, in which the rider often stands in the saddle or holds the reins high, employ very shallow rein angles, with average values below 40 degrees (Figure 6). This variation implies that rider position is a key factor influencing rein angle.

Figure 6. Rein angle by transport category for modern horses (and reconstruction of ancient chariots shown in Spruytte (Reference Spruytte1983)) (analysed by W.T.T. Taylor using ImageJ).

Consideration of horses at different gaits shows that rein angle also varies considerably according to speed. In Mongolian riding, which uses a simple bridle similar to those used in antiquity across East and Central Asia, rein angle becomes increasingly shallow with speed, as the horse achieves a greater degree of neck extension (Figure 7). There is a less clear relationship between speed and rein angle in traction horses, although the use of rein guides, which maintain a relatively consistent angle, could counteract the effect in our comparative sample.

Figure 7. Rein angles across different gaits, in Mongolian riding horses (figure by W.T.T. Taylor).

Bit type

Another potential contributor to the discrepancy between our DSK samples and comparative samples of riding and chariot horses is technological. In comparison to the jointed snaffle, which functions through pressure on the corners of the mouth, the straight-bar bit is more easily lifted between the teeth during riding (Manfredi et al. Reference Manfredi2009).

Archaeological evidence from Yanghai cemetery in Xinjiang indicates that leather, bone or antler bar bits were used for riding throughout much of the first millennium BC (Turfan City Bureau of Cultural Relics et al. 2019), and organic bar or rope bits appear to have been used to control most early steppe chariot horses. These bits, which function by placing pressure on the tongue, may cause comparatively less damage to the lower dentition. The high frequency of upper dentition damage in the DSK assemblage indicates that the bits were often taken ‘between the teeth’, with the neck fully extended—a dangerous scenario for mounted riders that often results in a loss of navigational control at high speeds (Cook Reference Cook1999). With the additional structure provided by a harness and a cart, the consequences of such bit-grasping would probably be less dire for a chariot team.

With no rein guides, the small stature of ancient Mongolian horses (often ~1.30m at the withers) could have contributed to a particularly shallow rein angle between chariot horses and standing drivers (Figure 8), while additional forces generated by rein leverage provide a potential mechanism for the severe tooth erosion seen in some DSK upper premolars. Alternatively, among horses that were clenching a bar bit between their teeth and receiving no downwards influence from the reins—a situation more likely in chariots than for mounted riders—the natural undulations of the body caused by running and breathing may have caused the mouthpiece to impact the upper dentition, resulting in preferential wear to the upper tooth row.

Figure 8. Schematic showing how shallow rein angles, used in tandem with a bar bit, might produce concentrated damage to the upper dentition (figure by W.T.T. Taylor and B.L. Morrison).

Riding or chariots?

Our results indicate that DSK horses were controlled at a rein angle sufficiently shallow to permit the bit to be regularly lifted onto the lower second premolars—likely at a consistently fast gait—and with backward rein tension or other forces significant enough to cause regular erosion of the upper second premolar. Our comparison with modern horses shows that both chariotry and riding at a fast gait are capable of producing shallow rein angles. Archaeological comparisons of East Asian riding and chariot assemblages show that neither provides a good match for the patterns observed in the DSK sample, perhaps due to the confounding influence of different equipment types (e.g. jointed metal snaffle vs organic bar bits) on the equine mouth. A pair of horses from the Petrovka Culture site of Novoil'inovskiy 2 in southern Russia, dated to c. 1800 BC, however, exhibit nearly identical erosion of the upper premolars to that seen in the DSK sample (Chechushkov et al. Reference Chechushkov, Usmanova and Kosintsev2020: figs 5–6). Future work could assess the osteological correlates of ancient riding and chariot horses controlled with an organic bar or bar-like bit, such as those from Yanghai and Sintashta. Another useful consideration is that DSK horses could have performed unique activities not considered in our comparative datasets, such as the transport of the large stones for DSK monuments that generated as-yet-unknown dental pathologies.

Implications

The DSK period is linked with the first appearance of the domestic horse in Mongolia and a variety of key social and economic changes, including the expanded use of dry, intermontane zones, increased dietary exploitation of horses and the emergence of horse rituals (Taylor et al. Reference Taylor2017). Our study suggests that, whether for driving, riding, or both, DSK horses were regularly driven at fast gaits, providing these early pastoralists with the speed and mobility that stimulated these key cultural changes.

Although we excluded juvenile specimens from our analysis, we also found upper premolar erosion and lower premolar intercuspid wear in horses as young as 2–2.5 years in the DSK sample, indicating that relatively young animals were used in transport. One such young horse from the site of Uguumur in Central Mongolia (Figure B1) was previously recognised as having undergone surgical modification of its incorrectly erupted deciduous incisors—the oldest known evidence for veterinary dentistry (Taylor et al. Reference Taylor2018). Our results suggest that use of horses in transport may have been a driving force behind this innovative veterinary care.

Available archaeological data support the notion that chariots were a practical part of subsistence and pastoral life in the Bronze Age Eastern Steppe. Chariots are typically depicted in petroglyphs as engaged in big-game hunting and other domestic scenes (Jacobson-Tepfer Reference Jacobson-Tepfer2015). One petroglyph from Mongolia shows a chariot ‘chasing’ a herd of horses (Littauer et al. Reference Littauer, Crouwel and Raulwing2002: 113). Given the high frequency of tooth damage caused by bit-grasping in the DSK assemblage—implying a regular loss of control for mounted riders—perhaps the additional structure provided by a yoke and harness, along with the calming presence of a second animal (Dietz Reference Dietz, Renfrew and Levine2003), gave paired cart transport key advantages over mounted riding.

The importance of chariot horses in DSK sites is clear in funerary architecture. DSK horses with transport-related osteological features are often recovered from rows of burial mounds (groups of four) along the east side of standing stones and burial mounds (Figure 9; Taylor Reference Taylor2017). Many khirigsuurs are surrounded by a stone ‘fence’, with a small stone circle at each corner (Figure 9: right). At large khirigsuurs, the heads of buried horses are oriented as if pulling the deceased towards the rising sun (Lepetz et al. Reference Lepetz2019). If the special row of transport horses were intended to represent a team of driving horses, the khirigsuur plan-view resembles a ger tereg or wheeled yurt cart (Figure 9). Mobile residences of this type were popular for leaders on campaign during the thirteenth to fourteenth century AD Mongol Empire (Andrews Reference Andrews1999), but have also been identified in rock art and other carvings dating back to the late first millennium BC (e.g. Miller Reference Miller2012).

Figure 9. Site plan of a Deer Stone-Khirigsuur burial at the site of Shatar Chuluu in Bayankhongor province, Central Mongolia (right), and its similarity to a wheeled ‘ger tereg’ led by a special row of horses (left) (figure by J. Bayarsaikhan and B.L. Morrison).

A model for the early DSK period in which either early horseback riding employed high-risk fast gaits and/or in which chariotry was the preferred form of transport would help explain why DSK sites appear concurrently with horses in Central China (Taylor et al. Reference Taylor2017). Horse riding was not widely adopted south of the Mongolian Steppe until the second half of the first millennium BC (Cooke Reference Cooke2000). By the time riding was adopted in China in the fourth century BC, the widespread availability of the jointed metal snaffle-bit may have given riders improved safety and control (Li et al. Reference Li2020).

Conclusions

While much remains unclear about the early history of horse transport, newly identified osteological patterns from archaeological contexts in Mongolia suggest that the earliest domestic horses identified in the region—those of the Late Bronze Age DSK—were controlled in a way that produced unique damage patterns to their upper dentition, probably resulting from a shallow rein angle and fast gait. Although both chariotry and riding using an organic bar bit could have contributed to these patterns, it is clear that DSK horses commonly took the ‘bit between the teeth’, which would have resulted in temporary lack of control for mounted riders. These findings imply an element of danger to mounted riding during the late second millennium BC that may help to explain the absence of equestrianism from early Chinese archaeological contexts, and could indicate an expanded practical role for chariots in early pastoral lifeways of the eastern Eurasian Steppe.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the National Museum of Mongolia, the Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology and our anonymous reviewers for helping to improve this manuscript.

Funding statement

The research was partially conducted with the financial support of the University of Colorado, and the Government of the Russian Federation (Igor Chechushkov) (project FENU-2020-0021).

Supplementary material

To view supplementary material for this article, please visit https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2021.146

References

Allard, F. et al. 2007. Ritual horses in Bronze Age and present day Mongolia, in Popova, L., Hartley, C. & Smith, A. (ed.) Social orders and social landscapes: 151–62. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Andrews, P.A. 1999. Felt tents and pavilions: the nomadic tradition and its interaction with princely tentage, volume 2. Bishop's Stortford: Melisende.Google Scholar
Anthony, D.W. 2007. The horse, the wheel and language. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Anthony, D.W & Brown, D.. 1998. Bit-wear, horseback riding and the Botai site in Kazakhstan. Journal of Archaeological Science 25: 331–47. https://doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1997.0242Google Scholar
Anthony, D.W., Telegin, D.Y. & Brown, D.. 1991. The origin of horseback riding. Scientific American 265: 94101. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican1291-94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartosiewicz, L. & Gal, E.. 2013. Shuffling nags, lame ducks: the archaeology of animal disease. Oxford: Oxbow. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvh1djdqCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bendrey, R. 2007. New methods for the identification of evidence for bitting on horse remains from archaeological sites. Journal of Archaeological Science 34: 1036–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2006.09.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bendrey, R. 2008. An analysis of the factors developing an equine cranial enthesopathy. Veterinarija ir Zootechnika 41: 2531.Google Scholar
Benecke, N. 2007. The horse skeletons from the Scythian royal grave mound at Arzan 2 (Tuva, W. Siberia): skeletal series and their socio-economic context. Documenta Archaeobiologiae 5: 115–31.Google Scholar
Bennett, D.G. 2005. Bits, bridles and accessories, in Baker, G. & Easley, J. (ed.) Equine dentistry: second edition: 922. London: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-7020-2980-6.00003-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, M.B. 2018. Nomadic empires of the Mongolian Steppes. Seoul: National Museum of Korea.Google Scholar
Chechushkov, I.V. & Epimakhov, A.V.. 2018. Eurasian Steppe chariots and social complexity during the Bronze Age. Journal of World Prehistory 31: 435–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10963-018-9124-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chechushkov, I.V., Usmanova, E.R. & Kosintsev, P.A.. 2020. Early evidence for horse utilization in the Eurasian Steppes and the case of the Novoil'inovskiy 2 cemetery in Kazakhstan. Journal of Archaeological Science, Reports 32: 102420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2020.102420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clutton-Brock, J. 1974. The buhen horse. Journal of Archaeological Science 1: 89100. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-4403(74)90019-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, W.R. 1999. Pathophysiology of bit control in the horse. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science 19: 196204. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0737-0806(99)80067-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, W.R. 2011. Damage by the bit to the equine interdental space and second lower premolar. Equine Veterinary Education 23: 355–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-3292.2010.00167.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, B. 2000. Imperial China: the art of the horse in Chinese History: exhibition catalog. Lexington: Kentucky Horse Park.Google Scholar
Cross, P.J. 2018. Where have all the mares gone? Sex and “gender” related pathology in archaeological horses: clues to horse husbandry and use practices, in Bartosiewicz, L. & Gál, E. (ed.) Care or neglect? Evidence of animal disease in archaeology: 155–75. Oxford: Oxbow. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvh1drjb.14CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dietz, U.L. 2003. Horseback riding: man's access to speed, in Renfrew, C. & Levine, M. (ed.) Prehistoric steppe adaptation and the horse: 189–99. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
Fages, A. et al. 2019. Tracking five millennia of horse management with extensive ancient genome time series. Cell 177: 1419–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fitzhugh, W.W. 2009. The Mongolian deer stone-khirigsuur complex: dating and organization of a Late Bronze Age menagerie, in Bemmann, J. et al. (ed.) Current archaeological research in Mongolia (Bonn contributions to Asian archaeology 4): 183–99. Bonn: VFG-Arch.Google Scholar
Gaunitz, C. et al. 2018. Ancient genomes revisit the ancestry of domestic and Przewalski's horses. Science 360: 111–14. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao3297CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guo, B. 1998. Research on Shang and Zhou chariot equipment. Beijing: Culture Relics (in Chinese).Google Scholar
Honeychurch, W. 2015. Inner Asia and the spatial politics of empire: archaeology, mobility, and culture. New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1815-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobson-Tepfer, E. 2015. The hunter, the stag, and the mother of animals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kovalev, A.A. & Erdenebaatar, D.. 2009. Discovery of new cultures of the Bronze Age in Mongolia according to the data obtained by the International Central Asian Archaeological Expedition, in Bemmann, J. et al. (ed.) Current archaeological research in Mongolia (Bonn contributions to Asian archaeology 4): 149–70. Bonn: VFG-Arch.Google Scholar
Lepetz, S. et al. 2019. Customs, rites, and sacrifices relating to a mortuary complex in Late Bronze Age Mongolia (Tsatsyn Ereg, Arkhangai). Anthropozoologica 54: 151. https://doi.org/10.5252/anthropozoologica2019v54a15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levine, M.A. 2005. Chinese chariot horses and the evolution of horse husbandry. Unpublished project report.Google Scholar
Levine, M.A., Whitwell, K.E. & Jeffcott, L.B.. 2005. Abnormal thoracic vertebrae and the evolution of horse husbandry. Archaeofauna 14: 93109.Google Scholar
Li, Y. et al. 2020. Early evidence for mounted horseback riding in north-west China. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 117: 29569–76. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2004360117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littauer, M.A. & Crouwel, J.H.. 1979. Wheeled vehicles and ridden animals in the ancient Near East. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Littauer, M.A., Crouwel, J.H. & Raulwing, P.. 2002. Selected writings on chariots and other early vehicles, riding and harness. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manfredi, J., Clayton, H.M. & Rosenstein, D.. 2005. Radiographic study of bit position within the horse's oral cavity. Equine and Comparative Exercise Physiology 2: 195201. https://doi.org/10.1079/ECP200564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manfredi, J.M. et al. 2009. Fluoroscopic study of oral behaviours in response to the presence of a bit and the effects of rein tension. Comparative Exercise Physiology 6: 143–48. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755254010000036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, B.K. 2012. Vehicles of the steppe elite: chariots and carts in Xiongnu tombs in the steppes. The Silk Road 10: 2938.Google Scholar
Nyambat, M. & Odbaatar, T.. 2010. Newly discovered deer stones from Zuunkhangai sum. Nomadic Heritage Studies 10: 5766 (in Mongolian).Google Scholar
Olsen, S.L. 2003. The exploitation of horses at Botai, Kazakhstan, in Levine, M., Renfrew, C. & Boyle, K. (ed.) Prehistoric steppe adaptation and the horse: 83104. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
Olsen, S.L. 2006a. Early horse domestication: weighing the evidence, in Olsen, S.L., Grant, L.S., Choyke, A.M. & Bartosiewicz, L. (ed.) Horses and humans: the evolution of human-equine relationships (British Archaeological Reports International Series 1560): 1375. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. https://doi.org/10.30861/9781841719900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsen, S.L. 2006b. Early horse domestication on the Eurasian Steppe, in Zeder, M. & Smith, B. (ed.) Documenting domestication: new genetic and archaeological paradigms: 245–69. Berkeley: University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520932425-020Google Scholar
Outram, A.K. 2011. Horses for the dead: funerary foodways in Bronze Age Kazakhstan. Antiquity 85: 116–28. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00067478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Outram, A.K. et al. 2009. The earliest horse harnessing and milking. Science 323: 1332–35. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1168594CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rudenko, S. 1970. Frozen tombs of Siberia: the Pazyryk burials of Iron Age horsemen. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Schrader, S.A., Smith, S.T., Olsen, S. & Buzon, M.. 2018. Symbolic equids and Kushite state formation: a horse burial at Tombos. Antiquity 92: 383–97. https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2017.239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spruytte, J. 1983. Early harness systems: experimental studies. A contribution to the history of the horse. New York: Hyperion.Google Scholar
Taylor, W.T.T. 2017. Horse demography and use in Bronze Age Mongolia. Quaternary International: 436: 270–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2015.09.085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, W.T.T. & Tuvshinjargal, T.. 2018. Horseback riding, asymmetry, and changes to the equine skull: evidence for mounted riding in Mongolia's Late Bronze Age, in Bartosiewicz, L. & Gál, E. (ed.) Care or neglect? Evidence of animal disease in archaeology: 134–54. Oxford: Oxbow. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvh1drjb.13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, W.T.T., Bayarsaikhan, J. & Tuvshinjargal, T.. 2015. Equine cranial morphology and the identification of riding and chariotry in Late Bronze Age Mongolia. Antiquity 89: 854–71. https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2015.76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, W.T.T., Tuvshinjargal, T. & Bayarsaikhan, J.. 2016. Reconstructing equine bridles in the Mongolian Bronze Age. Journal of Ethnobiology 36: 554–70. https://doi.org/10.2993/0278-0771-36.3.554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, W.T.T. et al. 2017. A Bayesian chronology for early domestic horse use in the Eastern Steppe. Journal of Archaeological Science 81: 4958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2017.03.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, W.T.T. 2018. Origins of equine dentistry. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 115: E6707–15. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1721189115CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, W.T.T. 2020. Early pastoral economies and herding transitions in eastern Eurasia. Nature: Scientific Reports 10: 1001. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-60516-2Google ScholarPubMed
Turfan City Bureau of Cultural Relics, Xinjiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, Academy of Turfanology & Turfan Museum. 2019. Report of archaeological excavations at Yanghai Ccemetery. Beijing: Cultural Relics (in Chinese).Google Scholar
Wagner, M. et al. 2011. Radiocarbon-dated archaeological record of early first-millennium BC mounted pastoralists in the Kunlun Mountains, China. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 108: 15733–38. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1105273108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, J.A. 2008. Elite equids: redefining equid burials of the mid- to late 3rd millennium BC from Umm el-Marra, Syria. Persée-Portail des revues scientifiques en SHS 49: 499519.Google Scholar
Wilkin, S. et al. 2020. Dairy pastoralism sustained eastern Eurasian Steppe populations for 5000 years. Nature Ecology & Evolution 4: 346–55. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-1120-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Volkov, V.V. 2002 [1981]. Deer stones of Mongolia. Ulaanbaatar: Mongolian Academy of Sciences (in Mongolian).Google Scholar
Wu, X. 2013. Chariots in early China: origins, cultural interaction, and identity. Oxford: Archaeopress. https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407310657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuan, J. & Flad, R.. 2006. Research on early horse domestication in China, in Mashkour, M. (ed.) Equids in time and space: papers in honour of Vera Eisenmann: 124–31. Oxford: Oxbow.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Figure 1. Chariot images on central Mongolian Deer Stone-Khirigsuur Complex (DSK) monuments, including a two-horse (right) and a four-horse vehicle (middle); left) a typical DSK ritual head, neck and hoof burial (chariot drawings by W.T.T. Taylor modified after Volkov (2002 [1981]: 93 & 218) and Nyambat and Odbaatar (2010: 64)).

Figure 1

Figure 2. Bit-wear to the upper and lower premolars in two riding horses from Turkic (fifth to eighth centuries AD; NMM 011) (left) and Pazyryk (fourth century BC; NMM 013) (right). Images show the pairing of upper premolar wear with severe lower premolar wear (figure by W.T.T. Taylor).

Figure 2

Figure 3. Left) bit damage to both lower and upper premolars caused by the use of a metal bit while pulling a chariot, from the Eastern Zhou Dynasty site of Cuiyuanxiaoqu (photograph by J. Cao); right) bronze bit from tomb 62, Xincun site (modified by W.T.T. Taylor after Guo (1998: 61)).

Figure 3

Figure 4. Abnormal wear to the upper premolars in Deer Stone-Khirigsuur horses: top) 14–15-year-old female (NMM 002); lower left) >16 year-old female (NMM 095); lower right) >16-year-old of indeterminate sex (NMM 001) (figure by W.T.T. Taylor).

Figure 4

Figure 5. Intercuspid wear of the lower jaw in Deer Stone-Khirigsuur horses: top left) polishing of the occlusal surface of a lower right second premolar (~6–7-year-old male; NMM 008); top right) wear to the lower third premolar (>16-year-old female; NMM 095). Several instances of bulging deformation of the mandibular margin of the lateral alveolar exterior surface near the affected teeth (>20-year-old of indeterminate sex (NMM 051, lower left) and male, 6–7 years (NMM 008, lower right)) (figure by W.T.T. Taylor).

Figure 5

Figure 6. Rein angle by transport category for modern horses (and reconstruction of ancient chariots shown in Spruytte (1983)) (analysed by W.T.T. Taylor using ImageJ).

Figure 6

Figure 7. Rein angles across different gaits, in Mongolian riding horses (figure by W.T.T. Taylor).

Figure 7

Figure 8. Schematic showing how shallow rein angles, used in tandem with a bar bit, might produce concentrated damage to the upper dentition (figure by W.T.T. Taylor and B.L. Morrison).

Figure 8

Figure 9. Site plan of a Deer Stone-Khirigsuur burial at the site of Shatar Chuluu in Bayankhongor province, Central Mongolia (right), and its similarity to a wheeled ‘ger tereg’ led by a special row of horses (left) (figure by J. Bayarsaikhan and B.L. Morrison).

Supplementary material: PDF

Taylor et al. supplementary material

Taylor et al. supplementary material

Download Taylor et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 1.5 MB