So I was thinking...?

Question

This is a theory I was thinking about when I saw horses doing work. Horses were domesticated somewhere between 4500BC - 2000BC

Prior to 1492 there were two worlds. Europe, Africa and Asia were the known world. The Americas formed the unknown world.

What if the biggest reason why the Native American people were less advanced is because horses in Americas were extinct by 8000BC.

Think about it, horses can exert more physical force and travel faster than a human. I think using horses enable people to build faster and larger, establish larger nations, travel faster, fight better and so on...

Uh I didn't say they were backward.

I'm thinking their advancement was limited because they didn't have the transport and power the horse provides.

Advanced warfare advanced irrigation advanced building techniques.

You are right Native Americans were advanced in math and astronomy in calculating time and even building without benefit of beast of burden HOWEVER the EASTERN WORLD was just generally more advanced and powerful.

You can argue point to point that canibals in New Guinea are advanced to... but they don't have big huge nuclear powered floating airports.

Some people get what I'm saying, some are taking offense because they make their OWN ASSUMPTIONS, and other are just bogged down in irrelevant details, look at the big picture.

Answer 1

wht happens if all idiots get extict who will make all these silly theories

Answer 2

Actually, that is one of the (many) reasons that Native Americans weren't as advanced, at least in the case of war-making technology, as Europe. North Americans didn't have metallurgy, either. This doesn't mean they were _backward_. Check out some of the mounds, or the pueblos, or anything south of Texas. You can do a hell of a lot without metallurgy or draft animals, but there are a lot of things that aren't open to you without them. Without those things, unfortunately, the tribes were no match for European invaders.

The interesting thing is, there were animals that were probably suited for domestication back when humans first got over here (probably: most animals don't take to it very well). They were part of a huge die-off that happened right around then. One theory holds that it was the fault of humans. This was back before domestication was the Hot New Thing, and these people came upon a whole couple of continents of big, tasty animals that had never seen a human before. Since this was well before we knew about maintaining breeding populations and the effects of over-hunting, the natives may very well have hunted them off.

Oh, dude, I just skimmed some of the other answers. Guys, native Americans are _people_, just like everyone else. There are some great Indians, and some truly nasty ones, and most fall somewhere in between, just like Europeans and Asians and every other type of people. That Noble Savage nonsense is just as racist and wrong as the Just Plain Savage nonsense. As for the "living in harmony with nature", sure, for the most part. It happens with all successful hunter/gatherer groups- you live in harmony or you die. Ask yourself this, though: why are so many large-population towns built in the middle of the Southwestern desert? Could it be because at least parts of it _weren't_ a desert before people deforested it?

Answer 3

Then how do you explain the Maya and Aztec civilizations? They are also Native American, and they had no beasts of burden other than each other - their largest domesticated animal was the turkey, and there is no evidence that they used wheels on anything but little toy figurines. Yet they managed to create complex, integrated civilizations with writing systems, astronomy, long-distance trading networks, monumental constructions... etc.

Also, beware of how you use the term 'advanced.' Just because a society does not have what *we* consider advanced technology, does not mean that the society was not advanced in other ways. Native American societies have, and are known to have had, complex social structures, ritual and mythological traditions, and a highly developed body of knowledge of the world around them. They were no dummies.

Be careful of any theory that posits a single variable (here, horses) as the reason for any major development in history. It's always more complicated than that.

Answer 4

I think it's a good thought. and to the comment below, I don't think you were trying to put down anyone. Horses did change the lives of many people in different worlds for the better. Not having the horses didn't mean they were backwards, they just didn't have the means to travel faster or take advantage to what horses had to offer. As you can tell with history life in America changed after horses were brought here. I say great thinking. It is just an opinion and people shouldn't be put down from this thought.

Answer 5

If you compare the cities in the New World to those in the Old World at the time of Contact, the idea that the Europeans were somehow more advanced seems to shrink very rapidly. Much of North America did not develop metallurgy for whatever reason, but their stone tools and ceramic manufacture were just as impressive as those being produced across the Atlantic. Stone tools even moreso, since they weren't being used much in the Old World anymore. Many European explorers were rather amazed at the societies and cities they encountered as they travelled.

In fact, Cortez's men found their Eurpoean metal armor mostly useless against atlatl-launched obsidian tipped spears. They had to switch to leather armor to avoid getting impaled from hundreds of yards away.

American natives didn't become "backward" until they were mostly wiped out by disease and became vastly outnumbered. Don't confuse the Columbus/Arawak exchange with the Cortez/Aztec one.

Answer 6

I think there are other reasons why the Native Americans were less advanced, although horses were a plus in the Old World. Society, beliefs, all that plays a part.

Answer 7

Your thinking is correct, but not just for the lack of horses, but for any large beast of burden. The largest domesticated beast of burden in South America was the llama, which was not much use for agriculture or for riding. The Bison in North America was not used for agriculture, just hunted for food. There were no metal ploughs in use, just large sharpened sticks, used by human power alone, so development was limited in this regard. Without the travelling capacity of horses, large distances were not travelled quickly, so influence on neighbouring people was limited.

Answer 8

I'm sorry but this is a highly uneducated question.

First of all we didn't have horses in America before the settlers arrived. I don't know what you are talking about (but I would be interested in it because I have not heard this before)

But the uneducated part is that Native people were IN NO WAY less advanced. Seriousally. That is a common stereotype created by colonizers so that one did not have to feel bad that Native people's way of life was brutally threatened.

The government that you live by today was created after settlers learned of the Native government, they took it directly from Native people ( and then distorted it into something gross).

Native agriculture was HIGHLY advanced and worked with nature instead of against it. Are people did not go hungry.

There was no rape, domestic abuse, etc... Maybe once in a blue moon this happened but it was dealt with right away and didn't happen again. These type of crimes were brought by colonizers.

There was no alcoholism or abuse of drugs. In fact all but 2 tribes didn't have any form of beer/brew. All "drugs" that were used including tobacco were only used at ceremony.

Native people had advanced forms of astronomy/astrology.

People lived in peace and respected all genders and sexualities. Contrarty to popular belief we were not at war before colonizers came (there is a long history behind this that I can talk about if you email me). Most tribes were matriarchies meaning women had power in the tribes. Even if they weren't matriarchies then women were still equal. And people of different sexualities were never outcast, in fact many tribes held a special place for them.

People were highly spiritual and were able to pass on stories for hundreds of thousands of years without them becoming altered.

People knew the medicines of the Earth. Pharmecutical (sorry for misspelling) companies are still taking medical knowledge from Native tribes.

What on Earth do you think is less advanced about this???
There is more and more and more I could write here. Please become educated on this. And NEVER EVER again say that Native people were less advanced. I mean many Europeans were brutal killers for the sake of greed...

Answer 9

Good for you.
It's nice to think, and it's great to formulate theories.
As long as you keep a level head on your shoulders, and don't decide they're facts, without research to back them up, you can't go wrong.
Speaking of research, have you read Jared Diamond's book Guns, Germs and Steel? It'll answer a lot of the questions that you've raised.

Answer 10

Jared Diamond already developed this one. I am surprised no one caught that. The lack of large draft animals was quite telling. That point is obvious, so why are all these people castigating you for an idea of Jared Diamond's?

Answer 11

I would also reccommend that you read Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs and Steel"

This was one of the best books I have ever read.

He explains about how differences in technology came probably came about by differences in geography and domesticatable animals and plants.