FEEDING THE ANCIENT HORSE
Ensuring that horses are provided with an adequate supply of nutritional feed is
one of the most important aspects of horsemanship. Today it is a highly
developed science and many books are continually published on the subject.
The workload which has been demanded of horses since their domestication has
been extremely heavy and requires that they be in peak physical condition.
Ensuring they receive adequate nutrition is especially important when one
considers that, since their domestication, horses‟ nutritional requirements have
mostly been dependent upon humans. This article will show that the
complicated and exact science of feeding horses is not a new skill which has
arisen only in recent times but one that was firmly established many thousands
of years ago. The evidence which the sources reveal regarding ancient horse
feeding practices shows a level of skill and adaptability which holds up very
well when compared with most modern feeding practices.
One of the main requirements of a horse‟s diet is water. A consistent supply is
essential for well-being. A mature horse contains about seventy percent water
and it is important to maintain this level. If a horse is deprived of water, for even
a relatively short period of time, it can quickly waste away.1 In the wild horses
usually drink large amounts twice a day - morning and evening. During the day
they can receive much of their water requirement from moisture-rich grasses,
plants, and herbage. One recent study has shown that perennial ryegrass
pastures can contain over seventy-nine percent moisture. This is nearly enough
to satisfy the total daily water requirements of both pregnant and non-pregnant
mares grazing there.2 Stabled horses require a larger volume of water than those
in the wild due to their consumption of mostly dry feed - grain and hay.
According to researchers a dry food diet may contain as little as ten to fifteen
percent moisture which is less than a quarter the moisture content of some
pastures.3 Due to the dry nature of such feed horses should have free access to
water when stabled. A stabled horse can drink between twenty and forty litres
(five and ten gallons) per day depending on the type of work it is engaged in
and on the climatic conditions (the warmer the weather the more they need to
drink in order to replace fluid through dehydration).4
The other main requirements of a horse‟s diet are carbohydrates, fats, proteins,
minerals, and vitamins. Carbohydrates can be divided into simple, (such as
starch, glycogen, and sugars), which are found in young plants, grasses, and
grains, and complex (such as cellulose and lignin), which can be found in the
fibrous parts of grass, hay, and silage. Carbohydrates form the largest part of a
horse‟s diet and are essential for providing energy.5 Normally about four percent
of a horse‟s diet and seventeen percent of its body consists of fats. Although fats
provide a relatively minor amount of energy compared to carbohydrates they are
useful as a fuel store and as a protective layer under the skin and around the
internal organs.6 Proteins make up the majority of body tissues and are
necessary for both body growth and repair. They are especially important for the
development of young horses. High protein feeds include peas, beans, soya bean
meal, and high-energy compound feeds.7
PASTURE GRAZING
Although working horses spend much time confined to stables access to pasture
is very important. Whenever possible horses are allowed to graze and this seems
also to have been the case in ancient times. Greek and Roman writers mention
the importance of access to grass and list the qualities of a good pasture.
Aelian (2nd/3rd century AD) stresses that pastures should be well-watered and
spacious and that “horses are most fond of marshy ground, meadows, and windswept spots”.8 Columella (1st century AD) directs that pastures be “spacious and
marshy, mountainous, well-watered and never dry, empty rather than
encumbered by many tree-trunks”.9 The requirement of water for good pasture
is especially important in Mediterranean lands for, as White points out, due to
the dry condition of much of this region a limited supply of water will mean that
only coarse grass will be produced rather than the more nutritional tender
herbage.10
Columella states that an ideal pasture produces “an abundance of soft rather
than tall grass”.11 Aristotle (4th century BC) claims that young, green pasture
that is forming seed is good for the condition of a horse‟s coat but that when the
grass has „stiff awns‟ it is not so good.12 Both authors are correct in their
statements. Horses do prefer younger tender grasses and plants for as grasses
mature they become less palatable and their nutritional content decreases. On
the whole, unless available grass is scarce, horses tend to be very selective
grazers. They eat only young immature plants and grasses while ignoring the
coarser mature grass. Horses also will not eat the grass around their dung. Over
time this can lead to depletion in pasture quality.
The less palatable grasses are left to seed in „rough‟ patches where the
horses also dung and urinate. Tall-growing weeds colonise these areas
... Where swards are overgrazed, the „lawns‟ become depleted in plant
nutrients, the more productive grasses are suppressed and weed
grasses and broad-leaved weeds become established.13
This is why, today, many horse-breeders pasture horses and cattle together as
cattle will graze coarse grasses left untouched by horses. Cattle and horses will
also eat the grass around each other‟s droppings (but not around their own) as
neither are affected by the other‟s intestinal parasites.14 Pastures, therefore, are
better managed and better use can be made of them.
Cattle and horses were also pastured together in ancient times. Dio Chrysostom
(1st/2nd century AD) notes that they “often mingle in the pasture and graze
quietly and tranquilly, insomuch that to the eye the two breeds form but a single
group”.15 This cannot be taken to indicate that horses and cattle were
intentionally pastured together because ancient horse-breeder understood the
real benefits of doing so. Dio may simply be noting that when horses and cattle
are pastured in the same grassland they tend to gravitate towards each other. It
seems likely, however, that depletion in pasture quality in areas where horses
grazed alone would have been noticed and contrasted to those areas where
horses and cattle grazed side by side and that, even if they didn‟t understand the
why, ancient horse-breeders would have accepted the benefit of pasturing the
two together.
Strabo (1st century BC / 1st century AD) claims that the best breed of grass for
horses is Medic (alfalfa / lucerne), which he says was introduced into Greece
from Media (northwest Iran).16 Pliny (1st century AD) also claims that Medic
grass was introduced into Greece from Media and says that this introduction
occurred during the Persian invasion in 490 BC.17 He goes into much detail
regarding its productivity and management. He says that, even though it is a
foreign plant, “so great a bounty deserves mention even among the first of the
grains” and that a single sowing of it will last more than thirty years. 18 Alfalfa is
reaped every time it begins to flower which can be four to six times in a single
year.19
Aristotle, however, says that the first cut of Alfalfa is poor.20 Modern research
has shown that the first cut is indeed more often than not of poorer quality than
subsequent cuttings. While forage digestibility is generally higher early in a
plant‟s maturity the digestibility level declines faster than it does later in its
maturity. While the first cut of alfalfa can be highly nutritional, a delay in its
harvesting or a delay between its being harvested and being fed to livestock will
see its nutritional level quickly dissipate. The ability to harvest alfalfa at the
optimum time is difficult and as a result “much of the first-cut alfalfa produced
… is often of inferior quality to subsequent cuttings”.21
It is true that alfalfa may have originated in Media for it is especially abundant
in that region. It is probable that the presence of this highly nutritional plant was
of benefit to the breeding of the famed Nisaean horses of the Persian nobility.
The high level of nutrition present in this plant, as opposed to other more
commonly used fodder, allowed the Nisaean to reach its full genetic potential.
[Alfalfa is] a highly nutritious legume fodder and hay. The protein
level of other hays, even those of premium quality, struggle to reach 7
to 10 per cent, with poor hays much less. Alfalfa can almost double
the level to nearer 20 per cent. The nutritional aspect is significant.
Over considerable time superior growth was established, the animals
reaching their genetic potential so long as nutrition remained excellent
and selective matings were used.22
GRAIN AND OTHER FEEDS
When pasture is unavailable or when horses are confined to their stables their
feed has to be provided. The feed used in ancient times was as varied as it is
today and it seems that ancient horse-breeders had a good grasp of what was
nutritionally beneficial to a horse‟s health. They also recognized the importance
of matching rations with the type and amount of work in which a horse was
engaged. Horses burn up more energy when performing strenuous work and,
therefore, such horses need to be fed high-energy cereals and grains.
Babrius (2nd century AD) tells a fable of a horse whose owner did not follow
this rule. The horse belonged to a cavalry officer and during wartime was fed on
high-energy barley and hay. When the war ended, and the officer no longer
received a state feed subsidy, the horse reverted to being fed a low energy ration
of chaff (a by-product of grain consisting of husks and chopped straw). When
war came around again and the officer took his horse into battle it quickly broke
down due to having lost the essential condition of its former high-energy diet.23
Xenophon (5th/4th century BC) also mentions the necessity of maintaining a
good feeding regime for horses going to war. He stresses that that “while the
ranks [of the cavalry] are filling up, you must see that the horses get enough
food to stand hard work, since horses unfit for their work can neither overtake
nor escape”.24 His own preference was to provide a horse with a morning and
evening grain feed between which it was released from the stable so “that he
may return to his evening feed with more appetite”.25 This is not to say that the
horse only ate twice a day. When released from the stable the horse was let out
to pasture. It is also likely that the horse had access to hay overnight. Although
Xenophon does not specifically mention water requirements it is also likely that
there was a water trough in the stable and that the horse would have had free
access to it. There would also have been access to water when at pasture.
The grain which Xenophon fed his horses was likely barley which was one of
the most common grains grown around the Mediterranean and throughout the
Near East in ancient times. Barley is mentioned as horse fodder in a wide
variety of ancient sources. It was a staple in the daily feed for horses undergoing
the Hittite training regime of Kikkuli (14th century BC).26 Homer (ca. 8th century
BC) describes horses feeding on barley on a number of occasions.27 Columella
(1st century AD) and Varro (2nd/1st century BC) also mention barley as horse
feed while Polybius (2nd century BC) says it was the staple grain provided to
Roman and allied cavalry horses.28
Another crop used widely as horse feed today is oats. Oats, however, do not
appear to have been widely grown in the ancient Mediterranean region. Semple
claims the reason being that they were not suited to the environment due to the
lack of sufficient moisture.29 None of the ancient Greek writers mention oats as
horse feed and this is likely because they were not cultivated and only the wild
oat, which was of poor quality, was known.30 Oats only really began to be
cultivated in the Mediterranean region at the beginning of the first century AD
when they started to replace panic as a fodder crop.31 Pliny, who wrote around
this time, considered oats to be a degenerative form of wheat and barley.32 In the
Near East, however, oats were in use at a much earlier stage and were certainly
fed to horses. Alongside barley they are a staple feed in the Hittite training
regime of Kikkuli.33
Alongside grain many other diverse ingredients supplemented ancient feed.
Cato (3rd/2nd century BC) lists various fodders fed to cattle in Roman times that
were likely also fed to horses as the term he uses (pabulum) generally covers
feed for all livestock. Hyland believes this to be the case.34 Cato recommends
clover, vetch, fenugreek (greek hay), and bitter-vetch as good forage along with
the leaves of different trees - elm, popular, oak, and fig.35 Virgil (1st century BC)
further recommends the leaves of willow trees and broom.36 Hyland has found
that horses have a fondness for poplar and willow so much so that they will strip
bare any accessible tree.37 Furthermore the benefits to be had from consuming
such forage can be seen in the case of the British New Forest ponies. It has been
noticed that ponies that browse on the tips of broom fare much better than
ponies that only graze. This is especially the case during the winter months
when grazing is sparse.38
Homer says that Achilles fed his horses lotus and marsh parsley while
Columella mentions bitter-vetch being fed to stallions.39 Pelagonius (4th century
AD) describes a horse-mix which included wheat (likely a bran mash), barley,
horse beans, chickpeas, kidney beans, vetch, fenugreek, and occasionally
sparrow eggs.40
Increased nutrition is important for both stallions and mares entering into the
breeding season in order that they build up the reserves of energy which are
needed for the intense activities required during this period. Increased nutrition
is also an important factor in stimulating a mare‟s oestrous cycle. Ancient horsebreeders seem to have been well versed concerning the feeding changes
required for this season. Virgil suggests that in the lead-up to the breeding
season stallions should be fed with flowering grasses, grain, and fresh water so
that they “may be more than equal to the seductive toil, and no feeble offspring
may repeat the leanness of the sires”.41 Columella also recommends a special
feed for breeding stallions - a mix of barley and bitter-vetch.42 As regards mares
during the breeding season Virgil, Columella, and Varro all state that they
should be fed well (but not overfed) especially when they are in-foal.43
Feed is also very important for a young horse‟s development as a poor feeding
regime early in life will affect growth and health. A mare‟s first milk
(colostrum) is important for a foal‟s well-being as it contains high levels of the
antibodies necessary for the development of the immune system. This
importance was recognised by ancient horsemen and Aelian directly alludes to
these vital antibodies. He says that “every foal directly it is born goes for the
dam‟s teats and sucks the drugs until it is full”.44 He further states that if a foal‟s
dam is lost then it will be reared on the milk of another horse.45 This still
happens today when a foal is orphaned. The foal can be „fostered‟ onto another
mare that has just lost a new-born foal or to a mare of lesser quality whose own
foal is taken away and hand-reared.
Varro suggests that when foals are five months of age they should be fed
“barley-meal ground with bran and whatever other product of the soil they
relish”. As yearlings they should be fed barley and bran for as long as they
remain suckling.46 As three year olds, when their training begins, horses should
be fed farrago (mixed green forage) as a purgative for ten days during which
time they should not receive any other food. After this they should be fed barley
in ever increasing amounts for four days with the level reached by the fourth
day being maintained for a further ten.47
Farrago was a nutritious fodder mix consisting of various cereals and legumes
that was cut green and fed long. The three main mixes were “barley with vetch
and other leguminous plants; emmer winnowing sown with various vetches; and
ocinum consisting of broad beans, common and bitter vetch”.48 Farrago’s
purgative effect is due to the fact that green fodder is highly laxative especially
for horses just coming out of a winter feeding of mostly dry foods. In such cases
they should be slowly introduced to the lush summer grazing.49
The Hittite text of Kikkuli also contains much information concerning feeding
regimes, in this case designed for chariot horses in training. Kikkuli set down
not only the basic daily feed rations but also how such rations should be varied
depending on how far into the regime the horse progressed. Basic rations are set
out on day one and consist of set amounts of hay, oats, and barley. The amounts
are measured in „hands‟ (UPNU) with one hand equaling approximately 0.84
litres.50 Each horse received one hand of hay, one of oats, and two of barley
after their morning exercise; three hands of hay and two each of oats and barley
after their daytime exercise; and four hands of hay, two of oats, and one of
barley after their evening exercise. They were also allowed to eat hay
throughout the night.51 Whenever feed is mentioned after the first day it denotes
a departure from these basic rations.52 Although Kikkuli does not mention a set
daily ration of water it would undoubtedly have been constantly available while
they were in their stables.
The collection of Persian documents known as the Persepolis Fortification
Tablets (6th-5th century BC) also provide much information regarding the
feeding regimes of ancient horses, in this case, those horses bred for, and
engaged in, the running of the Persian Royal Messenger Service. Many different
categories of working horses are mentioned in the tablets. The „express‟
(pirradazis) horses (PF 1672) were likely used for the most urgent of messages
while the horses „travelling the road‟ (KASKAL.lg tuk-ki-na) (PF 1651 - 1655)
were probably the general message carriers. The translations of the other
qualifications has yet to be resolved. These include kullam (PF 1670),
baramannus (PF 1673), and siradakka (PF 1946).53
The series of tablets known as the S1 Texts deal with regular rations for animals
and of these seventy-six concern horses (PF 1635 - 1704 & 2060 - 2065).54 In
general the commodity used as horse feed is termed „grain‟ (SE.BAR.lg) which
was most likely barley. The basic unit of dry measure used was the BAR which
equaled 10 quarts (10 QA).55 A clear distinction can be seen between feed
provided to different age categories of horse. There are two main age groups punna (young) and ber (mature). Punna horses received an average daily ration
of just over 2 QA while ber horses received an average of 4½ QA.56
The term punna seems to have covered all horses that were not yet fully mature
and the set feed of the different punna horses may be determined from the
rations set out in the texts. PF 1661 describes three punna horses consuming 1
QA each per day, PF 1662 describes four punna horses on 2 QA per day, while
PF 1664 describes one punna horse on 3 QA per day. Hyland believes that these
amounts indicate respectively foals, yearlings, and two-year-olds.57
PF 1639 - 1646 suggests a basic daily ration for a ber (mature) horse to be 3 QA.
Such rations seem to have been the basic level needed to maintain a ber horse in
full working condition for, although the above texts do not mention any work
intended for these horses, other texts provide the same amounts for horses on
active duty. PF 1653 - 1655 describe horses „travelling the road‟ (i.e. on active
duty) each consuming 3 QA daily.
Other texts describe horses receiving a much higher level of feed and it is likely
that these horses were those reserved for delivery of the most urgent messages
and those working on the most difficult routes. PF 1635 - 1637 mention horses
„maintained‟ at various places on daily rations of 6 QA. Other texts mention
even higher levels of feed - PF 1685 describes one horse on 10 QA daily while
in PF 1682 another horse receives 15 QA daily for a period of twenty days.
Perhaps these latter two were malnourished or sick horses that needed to regain
lost condition.
The series of tablets known as the S2 Texts (PF 1757 - 1779) deal with special
rations for animals and are especially concerned with wine for horses. 58 The
basic unit of liquid measure used is the marris which, like the BAR, equals 10
59
QA. Wine is usually provided in bulk to be divided among a number of horses
over a period of months. PF 1763 provides for ½ marris wine for three punna
horses over a period of two months, PF 1764 provides 5 marris wine for eight
baris (?) horses over a period of five months. The maximum amount of wine
provided to a single horse is ½ marris for one month in PF 1775.
The S2 texts also, on occasion, mention other special rations provided for horses
including beer, grain, and grain products.60 PF 1769 mentions 3 BAR of barley
loaves fed to ninety horses, PF 1770 describes 2 BAR of mitli (a special cereal
product) and flour for five horses over a six month period, while PF 1778
describes 27 marris of beer being allocated to twenty-five horses over a period
of four months.
The measures of wine and beer provided to horses may have been used as a
fortifier similar to the way in which today some hunters and racehorses are
given stout as a pick-me-up after a hard day.61
DAILY RATIONS
Horse feed can be divided into two categories - forage and concentrate. Forage
consists of grass, hay, and other herbs and legumes. Concentrate consists of
various cereal grains. Cereal grains contain more mega-joules (MJ) of digestible
energy per kilogram of dry matter than average grass hay (ca. 12 - 16 MJ/kg
compared to about 8.5 MJ/kg) hence the name concentrates.62 This means that a
smaller quantity of concentrate can replace a larger quantity of forage while still
providing the same energy.
As a general guide the ratio of forage to concentrate depends on the level of
work a horse is performing. A horse undergoing hard work requires a higher
percentage of concentrate than one undergoing light work. A horse that is not
working can be maintained on forage alone although it is still beneficial to
provide it with some small portion of concentrate.63 The approximate ratio of
forage to concentrates for different work rates can be determined from the
following table.64
Work Level
Resting
Light
Medium
Hard
Fast
Forage (%) Concentrates (%)
100
0
75
25
60
40
40
60
30
70
The combined quantity of forage and concentrates a horse can consume each
day totals approximately two and a half percent of its body weight.65 An average
Hunter or Thoroughbred of today, measuring between 15 and 16 hands and
weighing approximately 1100 lbs would have a daily feed requirement of
roughly 28 lbs.66 With the exception of certain breeds, such as the Nisaean of
Persia, ancient horses tended to be slightly smaller averaging 13 – 14 hands.67
A horse of 13 hands can weigh between 638 - 770 lbs while one of 14 hands can
weigh between 770 - 924 lbs.68 Using a mid-range value our ancient horse,
weighing ca. 770 lbs, would consume approximately 19¼ lbs of feed per day.
Depending upon the level of work performed its daily ration would theoretically
break down as follows.
Work Level
Resting
Light
Medium
Hard
Fast
Forage (lbs) Concentrates (lbs)
19¼
--14½
4¾
11½
7¾
7¾
11½
5¾
13½
A good starting point in determining whether such estimates actually match
ancient feed rations is a passage in Polybius detailing the monthly feed rations
for Roman infantry and cavalry forces. Polybius states that the monthly grain
ration for both Roman and Allied infantrymen was two thirds an Attic medimnos
of wheat. The monthly ration of grain for Roman cavalrymen was two
medimnoi of wheat and seven of barley while allied cavalrymen received one
and one third medimnoi of wheat and five of barley.69
The fact that the wheat ration of a Roman cavalryman measured three times that
of an infantryman would seem to suggest that it was intended to feed three
people. If this were true then it possibly indicates that each Roman cavalryman
received rations for two attendants. If each of these attendants were responsible
for an extra mount then it would follow that the seven medimnoi of barley may
have been intended for the feeding of three animals (the allied cavalryman, on
the other hand, may have had only one groom and thus two animals to feed). 70
This does not necessarily mean that every Roman cavalryman had two spare
mounts as one of the extra animals may very well have been a pack-horse. For
the purposes of this inquiry, however, I shall take all animals as being horses of
like size and weight and requiring approximately the same level of feed.
Determining the exact ration of barley each horse received is difficult for a
number of reasons. Not only do we lack precise figures for the capacity of
ancient units of measure but the weight of a particular measure of grain can
fluctuate considerably depending upon a number of factors - species, the time of
year sown, soil quality, percentage of weeds and other plants in the sample, and
dampness to name but a few.71 A good example of the fluctuating weight of
grain is provided by Pliny when he discusses the various locales from which
Rome obtained her wheat supply. His weight for wheat ranges from less than 20
lbs per modius in Gaul and the Chersonese to 21¾ lbs in Africa and a high of 26
lbs for emmer in the lands to the north of the Po and in the neighborhood of the
Chiusi.72 As regards the weight of barley Pliny merely states that it rarely
exceeded 15 lbs per modius, although it too would have been subject to weight
variations.73
According to Rickman one modius equals about one sixth of an Attic
medimnos.74 Using Pliny‟s figure of 15 lbs per modius, therefore, one Attic
medimnos would weight 90 lbs. One Roman pound equals about 0.72 lbs today
so one Attic medimnos would equal 64.8 lbs in modern weights.75 Polybius‟
Roman and Allied cavalrymen would therefore receive respectively 453.6 and
324 lbs (modern) of barley per month or 151.2 and 162 lbs per horse per month.
At a daily rate (taking 30 days to a month) each horse would receive 5.04 and
5.4 lbs barley per day or about 5 lbs on average.
According to the estimated rations for our 770 lb ancient horse Polybius‟ daily
ration of 5 lbs barley most closely matches the feed ration of a horse that is
undergoing light work (4¾ lbs). This scenario would seem to match well with
the purpose of the Polybius‟ passage. The figures for cavalry rations are situated
at the end of a long section which discussed general aspects of the Roman
military system and was not connected with any war or military campaign in
particular. With this being the case it would make sense that the stated cavalry
rations would only have been the basic requirements necessary for maintaining
a horse involved in light work during peacetime.
This Roman ration of ca. 5 lbs corresponds well with grain rations calculated
from evidence in the Persepolis Fortification Tablets. We have already seen that
the basic maintenance ration given to ber (mature) horses seems to have been 3
QA per day. Although the type of grain used is not specified Hyland believes
barley is the most likely candidate.76 One quart of barley equals approximately
1½ lbs and, therefore, 3 QA would indicate a daily ration of about 4½ lbs.77
Once again a ration of ca. 4½ lbs would seem to indicate horses involved in
light work. PF 1639 and 1641 - 1646 simply state that ber (mature) horses
consumed a basic daily ration of 3 QA. PF 1640, however, mentions that the
ration was intended for horses „maintained‟ at a place called Kurra. It seems
likely that the horses in the other tablets were also on a maintenance ration and
that any work they undertook was of a light nature. PF 1653 - 1655 also
mention ber horses on a rations of 3 QA per day although in these cases they are
further specified as horses „travelling the road‟. If a daily grain ration of 3 QA
indicates a horse performing light work then these „travelling‟ horses may have
comprised some of the regular everyday mail carriers that journeyed between
stage-houses which, according to the ancient sources, were positioned along the
entire length of the Persian road at distances of one day‟s journey.78
Horses that were required to work the more difficult routes would have been fed
a larger ration. PF 1635 - 1637 describe horses maintained on daily rations of 6
QA (ca. 9 lbs) of grain which falls within the medium to hard work range for our
ancient horse. It is possible that such horses may have been used for the
delivery of the more important messages and that the increased grain ration was
provided so that they would make the journey between stages in less time than
the normal day achieved by more regular service. On other occasions we find
horses on even larger daily grain rations. PF 1685 describes one horse which
consumed 10 QA (15 lbs) a day while PF 1682 mentions a horse consuming 15
QA (22½ lbs) a day for a period of twenty days. Such examples may perhaps be
of horses which needed to be returned to condition either from an exhausting
few days of work or after recovering from some illness.
Another ancient source from which daily feed rations can be determined is
Kikkuli‟s training text. We have already seen that the basic feed of a horse
undergoing Kikkuli‟s regime consisted of three meal mixes of oats, barley, and
hay along with overnight access to hay. The combined daily ration of meals
totaled five „hands‟ of barley, five of oats, and eight of hay. According to
Nyland, one „hand‟ equals about 0.84 litres.79 Using Rickman‟s rate of one
modius equaling approximately nine litres and Pliny‟s rate of 10.8 lbs (15
Roman lbs) as the average weight of a modius of barley we can estimate
Kikkuli‟s „hand‟ of barley to equal approximately 1 lb.80
Since thirty-five litres (1 bushel) of oats weighs 32 lbs we can estimate
Kikkuli‟s „hand‟ of oats to equal approximately 0.8 lbs. 81 The horse‟s combined
daily grain ration of five „hands‟ barley and five of oats, therefore, would have
measured about 9 lbs. This is very close to our estimate of what an ancient horse
would have required if involved in medium to hard work and a horse starting
out on Kikkuli‟s regime would certainly fit that bill. Further into the training
process these feed levels increased alongside any increase in physical training.
A good example is during days 101 to 108 when horses received an extra night
ration.82 The grain ration fed to horses involved in heavy pursuits during World
War I (a workload which Nyland believes comparable to Kikkuli‟s regime)
closely matches Kikkuli‟s feed levels. During the pursuit after the Third Battle
of Gaza (1917) the grain ration fed to horses of the Australian, New Zealand,
and British mounted divisions ranged between 8 lbs and 10 lbs per horse.83
LOGISTICS
The task of maintaining a proper supply of feed for horses in ancient times must
have involved great industry. Huge amounts of grain and other feed had to be
grown and harvested or else imported at great costs from distant lands.
Granaries and had to be built and maintained and systems needed to be in place
to facilitate the dispensing of these stores when and where required. Pastures
had to be maintained to facilitate the grazing of huge herds of horses and still
extra had to be set aside for the growing of hay a large proportion of which
would have been set aside for winter feeding.
The true extent of the logistics of feeding horses is more easily grasped when
you step back from examining daily rations for single horses and takes in the
greater picture. While ca. 20 lbs of feed per day may not initially seem like too
much of a problem to procure the same cannot be said when one examines the
logistics of feeding thousands of horses for a period of many months. If we
were to imagine a stud-farm of three hundred horses each requiring 20 lbs of
feed per day then just one month‟s feed requirement would total 180,000 lbs.
And on top of this would be a monthly water requirement of 270,000 litres at a
rate of thirty litres per horse per day.84
If we were to take the example of the stud-farm of Tritantaechmes of Babylon
which, according to Herodotus (5th century BC), besides war chargers, consisted
of eight hundred stallions and sixteen thousand broodmares than an average
month‟s feed requirement would have totaled 10,080,000 lbs or 4,573½
tonnes.85 And remember that this figure includes rations for neither war chargers
nor for any foals or yearlings that may have been present. On top of this the
horses would have required a monthly ration of about 15,120,000 litres of water.
Multiply this by twelve for one year‟s rations and the logistical difficulties
become clear.
To feed and maintain such large numbers of horses during peacetime must have
entailed the constant work of a very large and dedicated logistical operation. To
successfully feed and maintain such large numbers during times of war,
however, must have been a logistical nightmare. During peacetime one had the
advantage of an in-place and functioning system. For the most part horses were
bred, trained, and stabled in regions that had plenty of pastures for grazing, haymaking, and growing cereals. If harvests went well, grain and hay were readily
available and facilities were on hand for storing excess produce which would be
needed during winter. If harvest went badly then surplus produce could be
brought in through established trade routes. During times of war, however, all
these safety nets were absent and armies had to rely upon what little then could
carry with them and supply from home and make up the difference through
foraging and the purchase or seizure of food stores lying along their route.
Let us take as an example the army which Alexander prepared for his Persian
campaign. According to the sources Alexander had approximately 30,000
infantry and 5,000 cavalry when he first crossed into Asia Minor in 334 BC.86 If
we stick to the basic daily ration of ca. 20 lbs feed, then Alexander‟s cavalry
would have required 100,000 lbs of feed and 150,000 litres water per day.
Monthly this would work out at total of 3,000,000 lbs feed and 4,500,000 litres
of water. And this figure does not include any of the army‟s pack-horses. Even if
we err on the low side and estimate one pack-horse of ca. 440 lbs (or 11 hands)
for every ten soldiers with each requiring 11 lbs feed per day then these extra
3,000 animals would necessitate an extra 33,000 lbs feed per day or 990,000 lbs
per month.
It would have been impossible for such an army to have carried enough fodder
to feed all its animals for more than a couple of days. Engels has shown that a
horse‟s carrying / pulling weight is directly proportional to its body weight and
works out at about twenty percent.87 Each of our pack-horses, therefore, could
carry approximately 88 lbs - just enough to feed themselves for eight days. Even
if larger pack-horses were used they too could only carry enough feed for
around eight days since a horse‟s nutritional requirement is also directly
proportional to its body weight.88 Our 770 lb horse could, therefore, carry up to
154 lbs which is eight daily rations of 19 ¼ lbs. Eight days should not be taken
as a rigid limit, however, as a pack-horse‟s carrying capacity of twenty percent
its body weight is only what can generally be carried without adverse effects on
health. In reality many people did (and still do) over-burden their horses and,
therefore, our eight day limit could perhaps at times be stretched to nine or ten
days.
Even carrying just eight to ten days worth of provisions would have stretched
things to breaking point. It is unlikely that the cavalry horses would have spent
much time (if any) carrying provisions as they would have needed to maintain
readiness against enemy attack and would also have been used for scouting
missions, forward and rear guards, etc. The pack-horses, therefore, would have
had to carry provisions for the cavalry horses as well as their own. If you add to
this all the other equipment needing transport - spare weapons, armour, siege
equipment, tools for building camps, cooking equipment, and food for the men then it is unlikely that the army could carry full provisions for anything more
than two or three days at most. It would more likely have been the case that
only a small percentage of each horse‟s daily feed (most likely part of their
grain ration) would have been provided from army provisions while the
remainder was obtained through grazing (if and when such was available) and
foraging.
Calculations based on early modern military manuals suggest that one hectare
(2.47 acres) of pasture is needed to support 130 horses for one day.89 Perjes,
however, claims that damage to the pasturage due to trampling would lower this
figure to around 70 horses per hectare.90 Alexander‟s cavalry force of 5,000
horses, therefore, would need somewhere in the range of 40 to 70 hectares of
pasture daily and this doesn‟t include estimates for the army‟s pack animals.
Roth points out that an army, which has sufficient available pasturage and keeps
moving, could theoretically feed its animals solely from grazing. He rightly
goes on to point out, however, that such ideal conditions rarely prevail. 91
With such being the case many ancient armies attempted to alleviate the
difficulties of foraging and maintaining supply trains through the setting up of
provisions dumps along their intended route. The Persians especially were well
known for such logistical planning. When Cambyses was preparing for his
Egyptian campaign of 525 BC he had the foresight to have his Arab allies fill
camel skins with water and set up water dumps for his army all along its line of
march.92 Although not mentioned in this particular instance it is likely that such
supply dumps would also have contained food stores and other military
supplies. After Egypt was subjugated the Persians arranged a more permanent
solution to water supply in this region. The governor of each district was
required to collect earthen wine-jars, which were imported into Egypt twice a
year from Greece and Phoenicia, fill them with water and send them into the
“waterless lands of Syria” where they would be added to the stock already
there.93
Another occasion where we hear of supply depots being set up was in
preparation for Xerxes‟ invasion of Greece in 480 BC. For this campaign
Xerxes ordered that provisions be stored in depots all along his intended route
of march so that “neither [the army] nor the beasts of burden in the march to
Hellas should starve”.94 We are told that four corn depots were set up in Thrace
(at the White Headland, Tyrodiza, Doriscus, and Eion) with more being set up in
Macedonia.95 It is important to note here that these depots in Thrace and
Macedonia were in countries already under Persian control and as such count as
supply bases on Persia‟s „home turf‟. Once the Persians armies had moved
beyond the Macedonian frontier and into Greece they would have had no more
supply depots ahead of them. Their provisioning would depend upon a
continuing supply train out of their own lands and whatever they were able to
forage or seize from the Greek lands they passed through.
Even if an army arranged hundreds of supply dumps and enormous supply
trains once the army began to march outside of its own lands its ability to access
these supplies was greatly put to the test. Setting aside the high probability of
the enemy attacks interrupting or completely cutting off supply lines, the further
away from its home base an army marched the further its supply train had to
travel with each extra day of travel using up further rations. With such being the
case each march further into enemy territory made foraging for provisions more
and more vital. If an army could be cut off from foraging then it faced the very
real likelihood of having to either retreat or starve.
If an army did not pay enough heed to securing regular food supplies then there
could be disastrous consequences. A relatively modern example of this can be
seen in the problems faced by German cavalry forces in the earliest stages of
World War One. On the 1st August 1914 a general mobilisation was ordered and
ten days later German forces were deployed on the frontiers of the Reich.96
Little attention, however, had been paid to securing provisions for their horses.
Due to the time of year they were occasionally fortunate enough to fodder
already harvested and stacked in the fields, however, the majority of the time it
was necessary to feed the horses on unripe grain causing much weakness and
sickness in the ranks. The situation quickly deteriorated.
Already on 11 August one cavalry division, its horses starving and
exhausted, had to be taken out of the line. Two days later, an order
for all the cavalry forces preceding 1. and 2. Armies to halt and rest
for four days had to be issued. In spite of this breathing-space, 2.
cavalry division (1. Army) was again brought to a standstill by
supply difficulties on 19 August, and by the time the Germans
crossed into France all the horsed forces were suffering from
exhaustion. 97
This desperate situation arose due to the German Army‟s failure to pay adequate
attention to the proper provisioning of their forces. This does not mean,
however, that preplanning in such matters would always prevent problems
arising. Even the best prepared army can face a sudden turn in fortune if it is hit
with some unforeseen event. This is exactly what happened to Alexander‟s army
in its crossing of the Gedrosian Desert in 325 BC.
Arrian tells us that when Alexander arrived in Pattala (a city on the Indus river)
he prepared for his march by sending out troops along the planned route with
instructions to dig wells to provide water for the army and fleet and by
gathering together four months‟ worth of provisions.98 Engles believes that,
since it would have been impossible for the army to have carried their entire
four months worth of provisions, Alexander must have planned for the majority
of them to be stored aboard the fleet. “For this was to be a combined land and
naval operation with the army providing the fleet with water and the fleet
supplying the land army with grain”.99
Engels suggests that the army would have begun its march with enough food to
cover them for about nine days and would have got its water needs from the
rivers along its route as well as from the well dug at certain locations. At
prearranged locations the fleet was to come to shore to restock its water supplies
and re-supply the army with food.100
Alexander departed Pattala in mid-July subduing tribes and
devastating the land along his route. What he did not realise,
however, was that adverse monsoon winds had prevented the
departure of his fleet and would continue to do so for a long while
yet. Having reached the Porali Valley Alexander now found himself
in an extreme situation where, no matter what he decided to do, his
army was going to suffer heavily. His options were severely limited.
First, he could remain where he was and wait for the fleet to arrive.
However, it was not possible for his entire army to remain stationary
in an area that has been devastated, and that, in any case, had only
sufficient agricultural resources to support a few scattered towns …
Second, he could have marched back to Pattala. But it was 290 miles
from Bela to Bahmanabad over territory that had been thoroughly
devastated by the army. Few, if any, supplies would remain in
territory that was mainly desert and that had suffered the passage of
an army containing 87,000 infantry, 18,000 cavalry, and as many as
52,000 followers … Given the circumstances, Alexander pursued the
third and most feasible course: he left a detachment of the army
behind in the Porali Valley and took the main army eastwards to Pura
through those inhabited regions of Gedrosia where supplies were
most plentiful.101
Amazingly Alexander succeeded in traversing Gedrosia and surviving to tell the
tale, however, he did so at a great cost loosing “a great part” of his army
according to Arrian.102 Alexander‟s losses were indeed great if we accept
Plutarch‟s statement that he lost “a multitude of men, so that not even the fourth
part of his fighting force was brought back from India”.103
CONCLUSION
This article shows that the horsemen of ancient times were well versed in the
science of feeding horses. The ingredients used for ancient feed mixes were as
wide and varied as those used today. The sources mention barley, oats, vetches,
fenugreek, marsh parsley, clover, and various tree leaves to name but a few.
Ancient horse-breeders also clearly understood the benefit of allowing horses to
graze at pasture whenever possible and they correctly stressed that such pastures
should consist of well-watered, spacious meadows ideally consisting of young,
nourishing, newly sprouted grasses.
It is also clear that ancient horse-breeders understood well the necessity of
varying a horse‟s diet, dependent upon its particular condition and the amount
of work it was engaged in. The nutritional content of feed was adjusted upwards
whenever horses were entering upon a period of increased energy expenditure
such beginning a training regime or embarking upon a military campaign. The
importance of a proper feeding regime for young horses was also well
understood and we see that diets were varied at each stage of the progression
from foal to adult horse.
The science of feeding horses consists not only of providing the correct
nutritional foodstuffs but also providing the correct level of feed. A horse‟s feed
ration needs to maintain a balance between forage and concentrates and this
balance needs to be constantly adjusted in accordance with the level of work
and exercise that the horse is engaged in. Ancient horse-breeders seem to have
had a firm grasp on this science as an examination of the rations levels attested
through a wide range of sources clearly shows. Evidence from Roman texts,
Hittite training manuals, and Persian administrative records all depict exact feed
rations carefully matched to horses at all levels of work. These ration levels
compare very favourably with most modern feeding regimes.
Ancient horse-breeders were also highly skilled in the logistics of providing
feed for large numbers of horses sometimes numbering in the tens of thousands.
As today the main breeding and training grounds were in areas that were rich in
both pastures and croplands. If enough feed could not be produced locally it was
imported through established trade routes and silos would have been available
to store excess for use in lean years. With regards to logistics of wartime
feeding no expense seems to have been spared in the attempt to overcome all
possible difficulties which may arise. Huge supply trains accompanied armies
and large feed depots were set up wherever possible along the army‟s route. In
areas where depots were not (or could not) be set up food was foraged,
purchased, and seized wherever possible. Despite the most attentive preparation,
however, the presence of supply trains and depots did not guarantee safety from
starvation. Even the best laid plans could fall apart as they did for Alexander in
Gedrosia and as they still do today.
REFERENCES
1. HOUGHTON BROWN, J.; PILLINER, S.; POWELL-SMITH, V. (1997),
Horse and Stable Management 3rd Edition London: Blackwell, p. 309.
2. KANE, E. (2007), „What‟s New about Water‟, Equus 359 p. 62.
3. Ibid.
4. HOUGHTON BROWN, J.; PILLINER, S.; POWELL-SMITH, V. (1997),
Horse and Stable Management 3rd Edition London: Blackwell, p. 309.
5. Ibid. pp. 310-311.
6. Ibid. p. 312.
7. Ibid.
8. SCHOFIELD, A. F. (trans.) (1958-59), Aelian’s De Natura Animalium (in 3
volumes) London: Loeb Classical Library, 4.6.
9. ASH, H. B. (trans.) (1941-55), Columella’s De Re Rustica (in 3 volumes)
London: Loeb Classical Library, 6.27.2.
10. WHITE, K. D. (1970) Roman Farming London: Thames & Hudson, p. 289.
11. ASH, H. B. (trans.) (1941-55), Columella’s De Re Rustica (in 3 volumes)
London: Loeb Classical Library, 6.27.2.
12. PECK, A. L. & BALME, D. M. (trans.) (1965-91), Aristotle’s Historia
Animalium (in 3 volumes) London: Loeb Classical Library, 595b28.
13. TEAGASC (2010), Grassland for Horses: A Handbook on Best
Grazing/Forage Management Practices and Techniques Carlow: Teagasc, p. 7.
14. Ibid.
15. COHOON, J. W. (trans.) (1932-51), Dio Chrysostom’s Orationes (in 5
volumes) London: Loeb Classcial Library, 40.41.
16. JONES, H. L. (trans.) (1917-32), Strabo’s Geographica (in 8 volumes)
London: Loeb Classical Library, 11.13.7.
17. RACKHAM, H. (trans.) (1938-63), Pliny’s Naturalis Historia (in 10
volumes) London: Loeb Classical Library, 18.43.144.
18. Ibid.
19. Ibid. 18.43.147.
20. PECK, A. L. & BALME, D. M. (trans.) (1965-91), Aristotle’s Historia
Animalium (in 3 volumes) London: Loeb Classical Library, 595b28.
21. RANKIN, M. (1993), „First-cut forage is “different”‟, University of
Wisconsin Extension http://www.uwex.edu/ces/crops/hoard1.htm
22. HYLAND, A. (2003), The Horse in the Ancient World London: Praeger, p.
30.
23. PERRY, B. G. (trans.) (1965), Babrius’s Aesopic Fables London: Loeb
Classical Library, 76.
24. MARCHANT, E. C. (trans.) (1925), Xenophon’s De Equitum Magisto
London: Loeb Classical Library, 1.3.
25. MARCHANT, E. C. (trans.) (1925), Xenophon’s De Equitandi Ratione
London: Loeb Classical Library, 4.4.
26. NYLAND, A. (2009), The Kikkuli Method of Horse Training: Revised
Edition Armidale NSW: Maryannu Press, p. 110.
27. MURRAY, A. T. (trans.) (1924-25), Homer’s The Iliad (in 2 volumes)
London: Loeb Classical Library, 5.196, 8.564.
28. ASH, H. B. (trans.) (1941-55), Columella’s De Re Rustica (in 3 volumes)
London: Loeb Classical Library, 6.27.8; HOOPER, W. D. (trans.) (1934),
Varro’s De Re Rustica London: Loeb Classical Library, 2.7.14; PATON, W. R.
(trans.) (1922-27), Polybius’s Historiae (in 6 volumes) London: Loeb Classical
Library, 6.39.12-14.
29. SEMPLE, E. C. (1921), „Geographic Factors in the Ancient Mediterranean
Grain Trade‟, Annals of the Association of American Geographers 11 p. 48.
30. GLADITZ, C. (1997) Horse Breeding in the Medieval World Dublin: Four
Courts Press, p. 128.
31. WHITE, K. D. (1970) Roman Farming London: Thames & Hudson, p. 210.
32. RACKHAM, H. (trans.) (1938-63), Pliny’s Naturalis Historia (in 10
volumes) London: Loeb Classical Library, 18.54.149.
33. NYLAND, A. (2009), The Kikkuli Method of Horse Training: Revised
Edition Armidale NSW: Maryannu Press, p. 110.
34. HYLAND, A. (1990) Equus: The Horse in the Roman World New Haven:
Yale University Press, p. 41.
35. HOOPER, W. D. & ASH, H. B. (trans.) (1934), Cato’s De Agricultura
London: Loeb Classical Library, pp. 27 & 30.
36. FAIRCLOUGH, H. R. (trans.) (1916), Virgil’s Georgics London: Loeb
Classical Library, 2.434-437.
37. HYLAND, A. (1990) Equus: The Horse in the Roman World New Haven:
Yale University Press, p. 41.
38. Ibid.
39. MURRAY, A. T. (trans.) (1924-25), Homer’s The Iliad (in 2 volumes)
London: Loeb Classical Library, 2.775-777; ASH, H. B. (trans.) (1941-55),
Columella’s De Re Rustica (in 3 volumes) London: Loeb Classical Library,
6.27.8.
40. HYLAND, A. (1990) Equus: The Horse in the Roman World New Haven:
Yale University Press, p. 42.
41. FAIRCLOUGH, H. R. (trans.) (1916), Virgil’s Georgics London: Loeb
Classical Library, 3.123-128.
42. ASH, H. B. (trans.) (1941-55), Columella’s De Re Rustica (in 3 volumes)
London: Loeb Classical Library, 6.27.8.
43. FAIRCLOUGH, H. R. (trans.) (1916), Virgil’s Georgics London: Loeb
Classical Library, 3.138-145; ASH, H. B. (trans.) (1941-55), Columella’s De Re
Rustica (in 3 volumes) London: Loeb Classical Library, 6.27.10; HOOPER, W.
D. (trans.) (1934), Varro’s De Re Rustica London: Loeb Classical Library,
2.7.10.
44. SCHOFIELD, A. F. (trans.) (1958-59), Aelian’s De Natura Animalium (in 3
volumes) London: Loeb Classical Library, 5.50.ii.
45. Ibid. 3.8 & 6.48.
46. HOOPER, W. D. (trans.) (1934), Varro’s De Re Rustica London: Loeb
Classical Library, 2.7.11-12.
47. Ibid. 2.7.13-14.
48. HYLAND, A. (1990) Equus: The Horse in the Roman World New Haven:
Yale University Press, p. 43 (cf. WHITE, K. D. (1970) Roman Farming
London: Thames & Hudson, p. 215-216).
49. HYLAND, A. (1990) Equus: The Horse in the Roman World New Haven:
Yale University Press, p. 43.
50. NYLAND, A. (2009), The Kikkuli Method of Horse Training: Revised
Edition Armidale NSW: Maryannu Press, p. 109.
51. Ibid. p. 110.
52. Ibid.
53. HALLOCK, R. T. (1969) The Persepolis Fortification Tablets London:
Oriental Institute, p. 47.
54. Ibid. p. 47.
55. Ibid. pp. 47 & 72.
56. Ibid. p. 47.
57. HYLAND, A. (2003), The Horse in the Ancient World London: Praeger,
p.123.
58. HALLOCK, R. T. (1969) The Persepolis Fortification Tablets London:
Oriental Institute, p. 49.
59. Ibid. p. 72.
60. Ibid. p. 50.
61. HYLAND, A. (2003), The Horse in the Ancient World London: Praeger,
pp.123-124.
62. HOUGHTON BROWN, J.; PILLINER, S.; POWELL-SMITH, V. (1997),
Horse and Stable Management 3rd Edition London: Blackwell, p. 317.
63. Ibid. p. 321.
64. Ibid. p. 321 table 18.4.
65. Ibid. p. 321.
66. Ibid.
67. Three skeleton from Knossos in Crete (670s BC) averaged 13.05 to 13.2
hands, two from Padova in Northern Italy (6th/5th centuries BC) averaged 13 to
13.3 hands, while fifty analyzed remains from the Pazaryk Kurgans of the Altai
Mountains (ca. 300BC) averaged 12.56 to 14.3 hands. Knossos – SPENCE, I. G.
(1993) The Cavalry of Classical Greece Oxford: Clarendon Press, p. 283;
Padova – AZZAROLI, A. (1985) An Early History of Horsemanship Leiden:
Brill, p. 137; Pazyryk – LITTAUER, M. A. (1971), „V. O. Vitt and the horses of
Pazyryk‟, Antiquity 45 p. 293.
68. HOUGHTON BROWN, J.; PILLINER, S.; POWELL-SMITH, V. (1997),
Horse and Stable Management 3rd Edition London: Blackwell, p. 321 table
18.5.
69. PATON, W. R. (trans.) (1922-27), Polybius’s Historiae (in 6 volumes)
London: Loeb Classical Library, 6.39.12-14.
70. WALKER, R. E. (1974/5), „Roman Cavalry Rations. A Calculation of the
Daily Ration of Barley Issued to the Troop Horse‟, Veterinary History 4 pp. 1718; ROTH, J. P. (1999) The Logistics of the Roman Army at War (264 BC - AD
235) Leiden: Brill, p. 63. Both authors suggest that Polybius‟ barley rations
must have been intended for more than just one horse.
71. STROUD, R. S. (1998), „The Athenian Grain-Tax Law of 374 / 3 BC‟,
Hesperia Supplements 29 p. 55.
72. RACKHAM, H. (trans.) (1938-63), Pliny’s Naturalis Historia (in 10
volumes) London: Loeb Classical Library, 18.12.66-68.
73. Ibid. 18.11.62.
74. RICKMAN, G. (1980) The Corn Supply of Ancient Rome Oxford:
Clarendon Press, p. ix.
75. Conversion rate based on RICKMAN, G. (1980) The Corn Supply of
Ancient Rome Oxford: Clarendon Press, p. ix.
76. HYLAND, A. (2003), The Horse in the Ancient World London: Praeger, p.
122.
77. EQUI-ANALYTICAL ABORATORIES
http://www.equi-analytical.com/InterpretingResults/CommonWeights.htm
78. GODELY, A. D. (trans.) (1920-25), Herodotus’s Historiae (in 4 volumes)
London: Loeb Classical Library, 8.98; MILLAR, W. (trans.) (1914),
Xenophon’s Cyropaedia (in 2 volumes) London: Loeb Classical Library, 8.6.1718.
79. NYLAND, A. (2009), The Kikkuli Method of Horse Training: Revised
Edition Armidale NSW: Maryannu Press, p. 109.
80. RICKMAN, G. (1980) The Corn Supply of Ancient Rome Oxford:
Clarendon Press, p. ix; RACKHAM, H. (trans.) (1938-63), Pliny’s Naturalis
Historia (in 10 volumes) London: Loeb Classical Library, 18.11.62.
81. EQUI-ANALYTICAL ABORATORIES
http://www.equi-analytical.com/InterpretingResults/CommonWeights.htm
82. NYLAND, A. (2009), The Kikkuli Method of Horse Training: Revised
Edition Armidale NSW: Maryannu Press, p. 123.
83. Ibid, p. 109.
84. A stabled horse requires 20 to 40 litres of water per day. HOUGHTON
BROWN, J.; PILLINER, S.; POWELL-SMITH, V. (1997), Horse and Stable
Management 3rd Edition London: Blackwell, p. 309.
85. GODELY, A. D. (trans.) (1920-25), Herodotus’s Historiae (in 4 volumes)
London: Loeb Classical Library, 1.192.
86. BRUNT, P. A. (trans.) (1976-83), Arrian’s Anabasis London: Loeb Classical
Library, 1.11.3.; OLDFATHER, C. H. (trans.) (1933-67), Diodorus Siculus’
Bibliotheke (in 12 volumes) London: Loeb Classical Library, 17.17.3-4.
87. ENGELS, D. W. (1978) Alexander the Great and the Logistics of the
Macedonian Army London: University of California Press, 128 - 130.
88. Ibid, p. 128.
89. ROTH, J. P. (1999) The Logistics of the Roman Army at War (264 BC - AD
235) Leiden: Brill, p. 128.
90. PERJES, G. (1970), „Army Provisioning, Logistics and Strategy in the
Second Half of the 17th. Century‟, Acta Historica: Journal of the Hungarian
Academy of Sciences 16 p. 17.
91. ROTH, J. P. (1999) The Logistics of the Roman Army at War (264 BC - AD
235) Leiden: Brill, p. 128.
92. GODELY, A. D. (trans.) (1920-25), Herodotus’s Historiae (in 4 volumes)
London: Loeb Classical Library, 3.9.
93. Ibid. 3.6.
94. Ibid. 7.25.
95. Ibid.
96. VAN CREVELD, M. (1977) Supplying War: Logistics from Wallenstein to
Patton Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 122.
97. Ibid. p. 125.
98. BRUNT, P. A. (trans.) (1976-83), Arrian’s Anabasis London: Loeb Classical
Library, 6.20.4 - 5.
99. ENGELS, D. W. (1978) Alexander the Great and the Logistics of the
Macedonian Army London: University of California Press, 112.
100. Ibid. p. 113.
101. Ibid. pp. 113-115.
102. BRUNT, P. A. (trans.) (1976-83), Arrian’s Anabasis London: Loeb
Classical Library, 6.24.4.
103. PERRIN, B. (trans.) (1919), Plutarch’s Life of Alexander London: Loeb
Classical Library, 66.4-5.