56 MOSTLY MAMMALS 



known. It has been well remarked that even these sculp- 

 tures afford evidence that the horse was a comparatively 

 new animal to the Assyrians — that is to say, these warriors 

 were not such splendid riders as were the Parthian s at 

 a later date, and as are the Turkomans now. If any of 

 my readers will visit the British Museum and inspect the 

 Assyrian sculptures, he will scarcely fail to notice that, 

 whereas those mounted warriors who are armed with the 

 spear manage their own horses, such as carry a bow have 

 their horses led by a comrade. Manifestly, the Assyrian 

 warrior was incapable of managing his steed when both 

 his hands were occupied with his weapon ; and he was 

 thus a far less accomplished horseman than the Parthian 

 or the Turkoman. 



Although the evidence is not decisive, the probability is 

 that the horse was first introduced into Assyria from Persia. 

 The ancient records of India indicate that horses were by 

 no means common there, while such as there were excelled 

 neither in strength, speed, nor beauty. The Indian climate 

 is, indeed, unsuited to the animal ; and there is no doubt 

 that it was originally introduced from the north. But the 

 original horse must have come from somewhere, and the 

 probability is that the nomad Mongols in the east and 

 the Turkomans in the west — still some of the most splendid 

 horsemen the world has ever seen — were the first Asiatic 

 tribes to subdue the noblest of man's servants. This being 

 so, and Turkestan and Mongolia being the home of the 

 tarpan and other wild horses, it follows not only that 

 the latter are really wild, but that the thoroughbred of 

 the East has the same ancestry as the underbred animal 

 of the West, and consequently that " blood " is merely a 

 matter of careful selection and breeding for countless 

 centuries, and is not due to inherent superiority of origin. 



