I'm working on a world building project was looking for a unique work horse/mount animal in prehistoric species and was wondering if Sivatherium Giganteum would be a viable choice. The world has technology about equivalent to the 19th century.
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
4
-
5$\begingroup$ Please add links that are very useful.I added a link to the species you mentioned in the title. Because most people will not know what that creature is. $\endgroup$– Gault DrakkorCommented Nov 23 at 1:02
-
4$\begingroup$ Whatever answers you receive to this, it's worth understanding why it's a poor worldbuilding question. The creature is as good a mount as you want it to be because we have no living creature data to prove otherwise. We can speculate, but a speculation yes or no is no better than your choice, yes or no. A worldbuilding question would be to bring us your choice (I want to use this creature...) and ask for help rationalizing that use based on what little we do know. After all, it's not like there's an army of people waiting to say you're wrong if you choose one way or the other. $\endgroup$– JBHCommented Nov 23 at 4:57
-
5$\begingroup$ There are a grand total of four kinds of animal that have ever been good mounts: horses, donkeys, and two kinds of camel (I'm not counting mules/hinnys as they're hybrids). A handful of others (e.g. various bovines and elephants) have been used as mounts at times but none of them come close to the big four. As a result, the real answer to the question "would X make a good mount" can usually be assumed to be no. But, @JBH has it right: this doesn't really matter for worldbuilding. $\endgroup$– Jack AidleyCommented Nov 23 at 14:16
-
3$\begingroup$ the general answer fo extinct animals is "if you want it to be" most of the relevent factors are behavioral and leave no trace. $\endgroup$– JohnCommented Nov 24 at 0:41
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
7
There are a few features of Sivatherium that suggest that they may not have been good mounts.
The males have horns (well, more likely ossicones). Creatures that have horns, antlers or ossicones are often aggressive, territorial, and prone to using these structures to defend themselves against rivals and other species.
Sivatherium is a member of the Giraffidae family. Zookeepers around the world would be able to tell you that while giraffes are capable of being friendly to their keepers, they don't like being touched. Giraffes touch with their tongues or fight with their horns (ossicones)... but if you stroke their skin, they run away.
There are suggestions that Sivatherium may have been hunted by Homo erectus. It is debatable if H erectus had the mental capacity to attempt to ride an animal rather than eat it, but being hunted by hominids would have led to the evolution of an instinct to avoid hominids in Sivatherium, even if only mild.
Sivatherium has a back that slopes downwards from front to back, like the other members of the Giraffidae family, so even if a person could get on, they would be likely to slide off over the tail. Animals ridden by humans tend to have level spines.
Sivatherium was about 2.2m tall at the shoulder, which would make saddling and climbing onto the animal rather difficult. It's not impossible as elephant handlers who face a similar problem can show, but it would make them less of a 'jump on and go' type of animal than a horse.
So, we know that male Sivatherium were necessarily aggressive, and potentially sensitive to touch. The traits that make horses suitable to be mounts don't extend to other horse-like species such as zebras, which can be trained to pull loads, but are 'too difficult' to train to be good mounts. There is a very good chance that Sivatherium would fall into the 'too difficult to train' and 'too difficult to stay on' categories.
Additionally, Sivatherium is a ruminant, a foregut fermenting herbivore, unlike horses which are hindgut-fermenting herbivores. Foregut fermenting herbivores must be careful as to the quality of the food they eat, since if they eat food that is too rich, they can suffer from a fatal digestive imbalance. This means that they must spend a significant time each day eating food of an appropriate quality. In contrast, horses can eat very rich food without consequence, and so if provided with rich food, they can eat it quickly and be able to work for a longer time.
This is not to say that riding Sivatherium (or using them as a draft animal) would have been impossible. As we don't have the live animal for study, all we have is likelihoods. The likelihood is that it wouldn't have been practical... but it's not impossible.
-
3$\begingroup$ I like the answer and up voted, but to play devil's advocate: (1) Reindeer have been used as mounts, (2) assumes non-domestication, contrary to what would be necessary to meet the OP's hopes and (3) is likely irrelevant given the OP's 19th century tech level. (4) is an excellent point. I'd be constantly sliding off. However, this might only be an issue of saddle design. It would have helped if the OP told us which way they wanted to go. $\endgroup$– JBHCommented Nov 23 at 5:29
-
1$\begingroup$ "attempt to ride an animal rather than eat it": Gargur, stop playing with your food and eat it! $\endgroup$– L.Dutch ♦Commented Nov 23 at 5:52
-
2$\begingroup$ just becasue its going to drive the paleontologist in me nuts, Sivatherium does not have horns nor antlers, they have ossicones bassically spongy bone covered by skin and fur. $\endgroup$– JohnCommented Nov 24 at 0:36
-
2$\begingroup$ @RobertRapplean Consider moose cavalry which are now said to have been a hoax. $\endgroup$– Monty Wild ♦Commented Nov 24 at 1:36
-
2$\begingroup$ @MontyWild After reading that hillarious story about Russian moose cavalry I think you've completely made my point. If the world can lead itself to believe soviet moose calvary after just an article with a clear disclaimer that it was April Fool's Day fun (oh, that museum!), the OP need only present his/her idea with confidence and sincerity... and ten years later people will be quoting the OP as scientific fact. I consider that perfect worldbuilding. Cheers! $\endgroup$– JBHCommented Nov 24 at 5:50
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
1
Not great as a mount, better as a work animal
It is very large; 1250 kg plus. That's half the size of an elephant, several times larger than a normal horse, almost twice the size of a Clydesdale or ox. This will make it very expensive to feed. It's also probably not very fast. So, it's not optimal as a steed. However, it could pull very heavy loads.
Second, it is not domesticated. This means it would probably not be very obedient to humans, and therefore might not be useful for ploughing fields. Combined with its size, it could be dangerous.
It would best be used yoked to machinery for pumping water or milling grain, so that all it needs to do is walk forwards.
However, you could say that in your world there has been a period of domestication. Perhaps a few hundred years of selective breeding for just temperament could make it safer and more trainable.
-
2$\begingroup$ We probably need the OP to clarify what is meant by "mount." People use/have used elephants as mounts as well as beasts of burden... just like horses. $\endgroup$– JBHCommented Nov 23 at 5:24