296 The Poets Beasts. 



makers. When they do speak of grooms they rate them as 

 second-class horses, and the " horsey" gentleman as an in- 

 ferior amateur groom. This is, poetically, as it should be ; 

 but, on the other hand, when we remember that nearly ^11 

 history has been made on horseback, and that it is to the 

 character of that animal that man is indebted for the 

 moiety of his achievements, it strikes strangely to find 

 the poets so consistently disregarding the strongly-marked 

 individuality of the horse. Its sympathy with human 

 beings — as is the case with the poets' dogs also — has 

 doubtless much to do with the doubling-upof the animal 

 with its master. Whatever nature it may show, it is always 

 in accordance with that of its rider. Its temper always 

 matches its trappings, is strictly in keeping with its 

 harness. 



Once upon a time — so the Greeks had the story^ — Athena 

 and Poseidon contended for the honour of being the best 

 friend of humanity, and, to clinch his claim, the ocean-god 

 created for the use of man the horse. Olympus had to 

 arbitrate between the rival divinities, and eventually decreed 

 in favour of Athena's olive-tree, "for," said Zeus, " I fore- 

 see that man will pervert the gift of Poseidon to the 

 purposes of war." 



Appeal, however, lies from the judgment of the Thunderer 

 to the ultimate voice of history, and if " in the fulness of 

 time" we could ask the question again. Paternity would 

 certainly reverse the decree of the Olympian bench, for 

 the horse has done far more for man than salad oil. 



In myth it is always noble. No monstrous form in 

 the classics has dignity except the Centaur, the Asvinau of 

 the Hindoos. The conjunction of man and horse in one 

 being was not considered degrading. 



^ IIovv miserably tlie poets use tliis hcaulifiil episode. See, for 

 instance, Congreve (To the Karl of Godolphin), or rarnell (Tlie 

 Horse and the Olive). 



