A Green Rider blog

[ofhoovesandheart]

“midnight blue” sand wash basin stallion 🌪️

[thecinematichorse]

normal saddle horse

normal saddle horse

another normal saddle horse! they’re killin’ it!

and… ah… found the Friesian…

[illuminaidan]

For those, like me, who didn’t know what a “Friesian” was and had trouble spotting the difference:

[illuminaidan]

I know nothing about this show, but I was curious about everyone calling the inclusion of Friesians anachronistic, so I looked it up.

Based on reverse image search, these screencaps are from a show called Cursed, which is an Arthurian fantasy that takes place as late as the 11th century:

That’s a time period when Friesians actually were being ridden by knights, and even an English king:

It’s entirely possible that horsetorians (horse historians) have other reasons to complain here – maybe Friesians were very expensive and the monks(?) in the show couldn’t have afforded one. But to me, this looks plausible enough to give the fantasy show a pass.

[thecinematichorse]

Hi. I’ve mostly been on hiatus from this blog for mumble mumble reasons, but I did want to reply to this because it felt like an earnest attempt to fact check and it’s an excellent teaching opportunity for me to explain a little more about why Friesians are generally anachronistic in films that depict a medieval time period.

The thing about the modern Friesian is that it is, in fact, modern. The breed characteristics we associate with it: solid black, minimal white, upright carriage, long flowing locks, baroque appearance, etc – were by and large developed circa the late 1800s (1879, to be exact), and the type was really calcified circa 1906-1907. While I wouldn’t necessarily recommend Wikipedia as your primary research point, it does provide an indicator that should make anyone’s eyebrows raise: “By the early 20th century, the number of available breeding stallions was down to three.” If you look at the the Friesian Horse Association of North America Website, it’ll tell you the name of the three stallions: Prins 109, Alva 113 and Friso 117.

As a pedigree nerd, the thing I found myself look at immediately was the available pedigree data, because a problem that plagues virtually all Western breeds as an artifact of Victorian-era breed codification practices is a limited founder pool and a relatively high level of consanguinity, owing to the fact that many traits that are stamped are done so through an increasing level of homozygosity. Prins and Friso are both paternal grandsons of the founder stallion Nemo 51. So, functionally – 2 sirelines.

Above: Frisio 117

Above: Prins 109

Above: Alva 113

Above: De Regent 32, sire of Alva 113

Above: Graf Adolf 21, damsire of Alva 113.

And they all pretty much funnel in through the stallion Paulus 151, dropping it down to a single sireline, because for whatever reason, Alva 113 failed to perpetuate his sireline. Friso 117 was the sire of Paulus 151 and Prins 109 was the damsire of Paulus 151. Paulus 151’s 2nd dam, Daisy, was also closely related to Alva 113.

Above: the stallion Paulus.

So, a genetic bottleneck in the late 1880s-1990s.

Also from the FHANA website:

1889: Radboud 67 became the last of only 5 brown Friesian stallions approved for the registry. The other four were David 11, Keizer 18, Minister Thorbecke 34 [one source includes Membrino] and Bruno 38.

1918: The studbook ended registration of brown Friesian mares.

A fascinating choice for a breed with an already extremely constricted genepool of sirelines as, if we choose to Ignore the fact that different colors are a form of genetic diversity in and of itself where we no longer have variation on the Agouti factor, this removed a significant % of the population of mares from the genepool, as well. Anyone with an exposure to the Friesian breed will also know that Friesians are not allowed to be Chestnut, which is similarly a fascinating choice because the Extension factor for chestnut is a recessive allele that requires both parents pass it on.

Take this really simple Punnett Square for the Extension.

Anytime you breed a Friesian with a copy of the recessive Extension factor (Ee) to another Friesian with a copy of the recessive Extension factor (Ee), you run a 25% chance of producing chestnut Friesian every mating. The only way to get rid of that is to completely eliminate that from the gene pool.

That’s also how they eliminated bay horses from the gene pool – so now every Friesian has two copies of the recessive Agouti factor (aa) and not one horse carries a dominant Agouti factor (AA or Aa).

The FHANA timeline also tells us this: they kicked another stallion horse out in 1935, named Cremer, because he threw too much white markings. Never mind that white spotting mutations are yet another form of genetic variation, never mind that they often spontaneously mutate and you will never be able to completely eliminate them because they will always be able to potentially recur.

The Friesian breed experienced a second genetic bottleneck in recent history in the 1960s, according to a 2007 paper by Marike Boer, who wrote on the genetics (and specifically the relationship between inbreeding and fertility) of the Friesian for her thesis. She was herself citing a 2004 paper that was studying the effects of inbreeding on mares and retained placentas during parturition. There are… oodles and sqoodles of papers on the lack of genetic diversity of the modern Friesian, and if you want to read some of them you can follow these links:

Genetic diversity in the dutch friesian horse

The Friesian horse breed: A clinical challenge to the equine veterinarian?

Evaluation of breeding strategies to reduce the inbreeding rate in the Friesian horse population: Looking back and moving forward

The Genomic Makeup of Nine Horse Populations Sampled in the Netherlands

The fact remains, the modern Friesian is not actually the Friesian of the early 1800s, or really even the last 1870s when the studbook was formally codified.

Dutch Friesian,“ in: M Czapski,“Atlas to the universal history of the horse,” Poznań 1876. Creator: Czapski Hutten, Marian (1816-1875). Date: 1876. Artwork mediumpen lithography; paper. [x]

Look at that white blaze and three white legs, including the high white on the nearside hind.

It would likely shock anyone with a passing familiarity with the breed to discover that this horse, Tello, (below) was a Friesian horse – back when the stubook also included the Warmblood types.

Sporthorsedata link, where the photos is sourced from.

Allbreedpedigree link, which calls him an Oldenburg (his sire is also a Friesian).

Check out Tello’s sire, Thor, and look at the white markings:

Check out Tello’s 2nd sire, Martin, who was “brown” aka a bay horse:

Not one of these stallions would be allowed in the modern Friesian studbook, because: a/ Tello is grey and b/ Thor has too much white and c/ Martin is bay, not black.

Some more East Friesian horses:

We can see that the modern Friesian also pulled very heavily from draught type horses – horses that were designed not for the saddle as a riding mount, but for pulling a plow or pulling a carriage. In the 1700s and the 1800s, trotting harness racing became quite popular, and so in addition to being used for carriage work and plowing the fields, they were bred for trotting in a harness. I did read a paper that indicated that they were raced for shorter distances, for example, 325 meters, and that as of 1979, it was believed that between 1800 and 1850 over 2,800 newspaper advertisements were printed to promote races, but I don’t know how accurate that really is.

What I can say, is that there’s been something of a reinvention of the Friesian as a saddle breed. A lot of people credit the 1980s film LAKYHAWKE for popularizing the Friesian as a medieval horse type, and it certainly did generate a lot of interest in the breed that has propelled it to 2025. Some of this movement toward the breed as a saddle horse is selective breeding, and some of that is also that the Friesian does naturally lend itself well to modern dressage because of the history of dressage as a riding discipline and the way it has been codified specifically for the benefit of the taproot of modern Warmbloods, which stem from similar roots as the Friesian breed: heavy draught types with an emphasis on trot action.

That said, if we look at historical photos that the taproot studbook stock was pulled from:

^ Held 140, foaled in 1928. (He was, by the way, the product of a full-sibling mating.

Photo: Het Friese Paard It Fryske Hynder. M.J. Barones can Heemstra & F.C.D. Popken.

Here’s a gallery of approved stallions, including older historical stallions.

This is such a textbook example of the way the codification of breeds takes what was fundamentally a regional landrace type of horse – that is, a heavy cart horse type that used to pull carriages and the plow from the Friesland region of the Dutch Netherlands – and turned it into a pedigreed breed with a registry. Dog people in particular will understand what I am talking about here. Here’s an essay from 2015 discussing the historicity of the Friesian horse vs the Frisian horse, and the way that the Friesian as we know and understand it is a modern invention. Page 10 begins discussion on a breed vs a landrace type.

The author of the 2015 essay cites a lot of papers I’ve also read, but I’ll just throw some highlights up. Claims that the modern Friesian is effectively the same as the Frisian horse the Romans rode are at a genetic level patently false, but it goes even further – at the phenotypical level, there’s not even remotely comparable.

“It may be of note that a horse’s mature height is affected by genetics, selection and environment 29 A combination of selective breeding and rich fodder would have affected the size of horses 30 As a result, withers height in horses varied from one location to another Horses found in terp sites were small, but Roman finds in the Netherlands and Germany, particularly in romanised areas, often exceeded a withers height of 140 or even up to 150 cm in the Mid Roman Period 31 It would have been rare for a horse in Europe to have a height at the withers exceeding 150 cm during the Roman Period and Early Middle Ages.”

You can read the book author J Savelkouls is citing on Jstor, the book of which which at this time is open access – Animals in Ritual and Economy in a Roman Frontier Community: Excavations in Tiel-Passewaaij by Maaike Groot.

For a frame of reference: 140cm is roughly 13.3hh, and 150cm is roughly 14.3hh. Large pony size to very small horse size.

If we look at the FHANA website and their breed inspection requirements, we see the following: Stallions are required to be a minimum of 1.58m (15.2 1/4hh) as 3 year old and a minimum of 1.60m (15.3hh) as a 4 year old or older. Mares for all registration types are required to be taller than 1.54m (15hh). Geldings are required to be 1.56m (15hh) for the studbook and 1.58m (15.2 1/4hh) for the Ster (a registration predicate which is like… gold-star above average registration.)

The Friesian Horse Society registration criterion also offers these height requirements: Mares must be at least 1.54 meters (15.0 ¾ hands) at the withers; Geldings must be at least 1.56 meters (15.1½ hands); Stallions must be at least 1.58 meters (15.2¼ hands) at age 3 and at least 1.60 meters (15.3 hands) at age 4.

Behold, the Bayeux tapestry and William the Conqueror riding a Friesian. That’s definitely a Friesian. We know this for sure for real. Because the Friesian studbook, founded in 1879, certainly existed in circa the 1070s CE.

It just makes me laugh when people say, “oh, medieval knights rode Friesians” when no, we don’t actually know that, and no, they likely did not, because the Friesian as we know it literally did not exist. The evidence cited fundamentally boils down to “horses that look like Friesians” which is by definition a landrace type rather than a codified breed, and certainly wouldn’t have been the sole purview of the Friesland – after all, those genetics do come from somewhere.

This is the same level of evidence we see presented by proponents of the Straight Egyptian Arabian who look at horses from Ancient Egyptian artwork, see a landrace type with commonalities, and proclaim their horses an ancient breed, the daughters and sons of the pharaohs, which completely ignores the actual history of the breed as codified by Arabs and the specifically the Bedouins AND also ignores that the Straight Egyptian taproot genetics stem from Abbas Pasha’s collection, which he specifically pulled from the Bedouin tribes of the deserts.

But if that’s a comparison the Roman era, the medieval period, what if we go a little further ahead in time to the 1600s.

The Friesian horse. Origin: Netherlands. Date: 1652. Creator, Paulus Potter, mentioned on object, print maker, Noord-Nederlands (1625–1654). Artwork medium etching (paper). [x]

Ah, another heavy grey daught type, like Tello.

And what of John of Austria’s Frisian horse?

As a stallion, with a star? He wouldn’t even be allowed in the modern Friesian studbook.

I’ve actually run out of my limit for photos, so I am going to post this and then reblog with more historical photos and artwork of the Friesian horse.

-Mod M

[thecinematichorse]

More photos of the taproot stock the modern Friesian is pulled from, dating up to the 1960s which is when the second major bottleneck of Friesian breeding occurred:

Above: That last photo really shows the trot action that’s designed for a roadster type of horse.

Above: Hearke 254 Preferent and his son Reitse 272 Preferent

Some stallions – they’re built long, with high, steep croups and laid back shoulders for pulling into the harness with a powerful rear push.

I’m going to reference the medieval war horse again, because the Arthurian legend era is set circa the 5th and 6th centuries CE in England – so, around 400-500 CE. There’s a paper from 2021 entitled In search of the ‘great horse’: A zooarchaeological assessment of horses from England (AD 300–1650) which looks specifically a medieval English warhorses, which examines archeaological evidence of horses throughout the time period referenced. They include a really nice graph on sizing:

And for the Arthurian era, specifically, which falls in the time periods defined as the Late Roman (300–410 AD) and Early Saxon (410–700 AD) periods:

As you can see, anything over 15hh, which is roughly the minimum studbook height requirement for a modern Friesian horse, was really unusual in the Late Roman period and has not been discovered in the Early Saxon period. Much more commonly seen were horses between ~11h and ~14hh, aka, pony and very small horse heights.

Friesian horses are, on the whole, too tall for a medieval Arthurian time period.

The larger point being made is, the type of horse the modern Friesian presents as is by and large a carriage horse from the late 1800s and into the 1900s, and you could probably go find a random vaguely draughty grade horse in a field that has been bred for saddle riding and get a more historically accurate type of horse for medieval England than you ever could with a modern Friesian.

The other problem is that the trapping historical films have rarely been about historical accuracy or utilitarian practicality, and typically try to present a fantastical retelling. Friesians look cool. They’re tall and upright and hairy with long, flowing, wavy manes and tails, and they’re generally very visually distinct from other horses. it’s such an easy shorthand in film to put someone on a Friesian horse as a way to visually signify that this is someone important that you should pay attention to – they did this, for ex, in the first Gal Gadot Wonder Woman film where inexplicably, WW was riding a Friesian while everyone else had some generic cob type. This is also why we see Ciri in the trailers for The Witcher 4 riding a Friesian type named Kelpie: our super special protagonist on her super special horse.

Fantasy in general (and to some extent, a lot of historical fiction is, really, fantastical) has latched onto the imagery of a Friesian type of horse as special. I see it all the time in books, as well.

The less we care about historical accuracy, the less important it is. If it’s all about vibes, sure. This is why I’m find with Galavant’s war horse being a Friesian, because the whole point of the show is that it’s a deeply unserious piece of media.

-Mod M

[training-with-drent]

The Green Rider example is interesting:

For those who don't know it - it's a book series about a woman who joins the royal messenger service, known as Green Riders (all clad in green, hence the name). Horses play an important role in the series, and a lot is said about how special the Green Rider horses are.

However: They are not at all described as anything remotely similar to Friesians. After all, they are working horses trained and built for long distance travel. In a later book in the series, we visit the person who breeds the Green Rider horses, which grow up in the steppe. My own personal headcanon for these horses is that they rather look like Akhal-Tekke horses:

In the book series, the Green Rider horses are special and quasi-magical, but more in a "the horses choose their rider" and "experienced horses have really good orientation and instincts" way.

"the long legged chestnut" is the first description we get of the main character's horse, which goes on: "The horse was a sorry-looking beast. His legs were long but thick, obviously he had been bred to run fast for distances with no thought to aesthetics. His neck reminded Karigan of her father's description of some long-necked wild beasts he had seen on one of his voyages." (i.e. probably giraffes; Green Rider, chapter "Dead Rider", p. 14)

However, this is not the horse depicted on the cover above.

The horse that looks like a Friesian is, in the books, a fully magical creature: the horse of the god of death, itself a quasi-god and bringer of battle and strife. He's the ancestor of the Green Rider horses in spirit only, and cannot be seen with eyes, only on some spiritual/magical plain of existence. Of all the special horses in this world, he's the Most Special.

"there he was, the stallion, practically pulsating in her vision with blackness against desolate gray. He pawed the earth, each muscle ripping beneath a hide smooth as ebon silk. He negated light, was made of its absence, like the night sky, the heavens; and when he moved, the grasses around him swirled like a dervish, though his long mane and tail remained undisturbed" (High King's Tomb, chapter "Shaper of Wind", p. 363)

So the interesting thing is that the writer described a magical/mystical horse as black with a long mane and tail, and with a smooth body. I assume the color comes from associations with night and death, which are on the one hand cultural and on the other hand a choice the writer made about that horse and what it stands for.

And then the artist paints a Friesian - which, fair. I would have too, probably.

So this is definitely what the person above me said: Friesians not only as medieval, but as a shorthand for a very unusual, very special horse.

[training-with-drent]

Not strictly Green Rider themed, but certainly something where Green Rider is worth being nominated, and as such maybe of interest to some of you:

Description:

This is a multifandom exchange centered around horses. Actual horses and horsemanship, sentient horses, characters transformed into horses, horse-adjacent magical critters (kelpies, centaurs, pegasus, unicorns, etc.) and pony play are all welcome! Seahorses are not horses but hippocampi count.

2025 Schedule: All times are in US Eastern Daylight time (UTC−04:00) at 11:59PM unless otherwise specified.

Nominations open: April 26th Nominations close: May 3rd Tagset cleanup: May 4th and 5th Sign-ups open: May 6th 12:00 AM (Night of the 5th) Sign-ups close: May 13th Assignments out: Within 48 hours of sign-ups closing Assignments due: June 10th Works revealed: June 17th (work reveals may be delayed by a few days to accommodate emergency pinch hits) Creators revealed: June 24th 12:00 AM (Night of the 23rd)

How about some Green rider fic in there? I haven't decided if I'm going to participate, but it sounds fun.

[lesbian-ashe]

I love it so much when women use masculine titles. Sir. Lord. Prince. King. it's so good. I need a woman to call sir while we kiss

[allbookedupblogstuff]

Spirit of the Wood by Kristen Britain

Source: Netgalley, thank you to the publisher!!TL;DR: An absolutely lovely novella for new and old readers about empathy and how life continues on. Plot: A new Green Rider has to keep his cold superior alive after an attack. They end up in a deep wood, and then magic!Characters: I loved the characters, and this as someone who completely forgot who Laren was from the original series. I fell in…

View On WordPress

[training-with-drent]

I haven't been keeping up with new publications for a while but this looks like something I need to read 👀

[certified-bone-owner]

idk if anyone here has even heard of the Green Rider Series, but these books were a really important part of my childhood

and uhh i am having Thoughts about them

Something thats always bothered me is the romance thing between Kari and Zach bc thats really weird and just meh. I suggest we ignore that and let the deep and undying devotion stand for itself bc i think that just makes the entire thing a lot stronger.

and i want Zachary to be low key taking advantage of the fact that our girl Kari would kill everyone in this country and then herself with no hesitation if he really wanted it. cause omg he needs to be more complex

there can still be a love triangle btw, i dont mind that. but uhh kari and the king should both be fucking Lady Estora

[training-with-drent]

I am a fan of unrequited emotions (of any kind) or relationships prevented by circumstance, so the whole mutual crush situation works well for me as long as it's unfulfilled.

But yeah, the true appeal for me is the devotion of it, the whole knight/king dynamic, and I can't get enough of that.

[birdylion]

Five of my Favorite Characters

@beatrice-otter tagged me for this game, thank you!

Five of my Favorite Characters

Karigan G'ladheon (Green Rider)

Isabella Camherst (The Memoirs of Lady Trent)

Samuel Vimes (Discworld)

Naomi Nagata (The Expanse)

Chirrut Îmwe (Rogue One / Star Wars)

Voting ended onJul 12, 2024

I'm using this as an opportunity to ramble about why these characters are among my favourites below the cut.

But first I'm tagging: @hermitknut, @bumblebee-and-tea, @caffeespresso, @freizusein, @shakespearerants, @biacetenebrae and @cleargreyskies. Anyone who wants to do this, feel free!

Karigan G'ladheon

She rides horses, she fights with a sword, she has the magic ability to cross boundaries of time and space, she's the avatar of the God of Death. She just wants a normal life. She refused the (literal) Call of adventure after getting home from her first one for as long as was humanly possible. She's a sometimes reluctant heroine, but also she does the things that fate asks of her because they are important even though it costs her a lot. I related a lot to her as a teenager.

Isabella Camherst

She has one (1) interest and she follows that interest. She's driven by so much curiosity and the need to know. Her husband describes the things she does in pursuit of said interest as "deranged practicality". In the pursuit of her interest she's absolutely unhinged. She's gender nonconforming not necessarily because gender nonconformity is a gender expression for her, but because the rules for conformity are so strict that she wouldn't be able to follow her one interest if she adhered to them. I just love characters who are very intense about their interests.

Samuel Vimes

I love idealists who are idealistic because of their live experience, and not their lack thereof. I love characters who strive to be better, to do better. I love a character who looks the darkness inside them into the eye and says "no we're not having that". That last part is what sealed the deal for me with Vimes; before reading Thud, I was fascinated by him, after Thud, he's on a whole different level of 'favourite'.

Naomi Nagata

Why I like her is similar to Vimes actually? She has gone through so much even before we meet her, and still believes in making the world kinder. That takes so much strength and conviction, I admire that a lot. Also, her willpower is beyond strong and she's the biggest badass in space.

Chirrut Îmwe

Characters who have a strong faith (that's rewarded by the narrative) often touch me very deeply, mostly because I don't have that; whatever faith I have is neither strong, nor has it so far been rewarded by my narrative, if I can say so. One would think I'd feel closer to Baze Malbus than to Chirrut, but it's the latter who brings me hope. To see a character who's so secure in their faith ... yeah, that touches me.

[the-punforgiven]

Worldbuilding tip for aspiring fantasy authors! Give that swordsman a bigger ass

[the-punforgiven]

That is the exact reason I made this post, hell yeah

[bisexualbaker]

[Image: Tags reading, #i hope people know this is real and true #hema tournaments are famously full of dumptrucks #because using your whole lower body to leverage a sword gives you a LOT of exercise in the glutes]

[sacarodianchronicles]

I absolutely love how Karigan is the epitome of the reluctant hero. This happens throughout the series, but is especially prevalent in the first book. I mean, think about her introduction to the story- a young woman is walking home by herself because she got kicked out of school, when suddenly, out of nowhere, a messenger of the king, bleeding out from multiple arrow wounds, bursts out of the forest and tells her that she has to deliver his message to the king as a matter of life or death, and then LITERALLY DIES ON HER. I feel like it’s hard to convey just how insane that is until you write it out. It’s crazy to think about how much Karigan’s life was changed just because she was in a bad mood and made a rash decision.

[training-with-drent]

Hello fellow Green Rider fan!!

Hello! We are few on tumblr, and mostly inactive, but we exist!

What's your favourite thing about the books? Who's your favourite side character?

[nothingbutvainfantasy]

I like the magic system in the books! Also Condor the horse having a large role. It's a tie between the Berry Sisters and King Zachary for my favorites.

[theexhaustedmermaid]

I accidentally re-blogged that to my side-blog. oops

[training-with-drent]

I was thinking about the Berry sisters too! Their house in book 1 is so wonderfully magical, and all their stuff gives interesting glimpses into the many ways what magic can look like in the world. Also, the strangeness of such a house in the middle of the woods! I also love that some of the magical gimmicks played a role later.

The horses in the books are so fun! You can see that Kristen Britain knows about horses, but also the Green Rider horses are just the right kind of Special. I loved the side plot in which they go visit the place where they come from.

What do you mean, exactly, about the magic system and what makes it interesting?

[training-with-drent]

Hello fellow Green Rider fan!!

Hello! We are few on tumblr, and mostly inactive, but we exist!

What's your favourite thing about the books? Who's your favourite side character?

[theprissythumbelina]

So you want to write about horses.

Or you're writing and horses show up. Or its a pre-industrial fantasy and your characters have to get somewhere. Or you have a faint idea of your MC's love interest showing up on a white stallion.

Whatever the cause, you're writing, and a horse appears. But you know nothing about horses. I can help.

This is a horse. Horses come in many sizes.

^ Big Jake, a Belgian Draft horse, and a roughly 5 foot woman for scale.

1 hand = 4 inches = 10.16 cm

Once a horse is smaller than about 14.2hh, it is generally considered a pony. In the modern day, ponies are not considered suitable for adult riders due to weight and height issues. Some pony breeds, such as Welsh, Fjords, ect. are known for being sturdy, and can more easily carry adult sized humans. Miniature horses should never be ridden by adults.

^The only suitable 'riding' a miniature horse should do

The above graphic mentions that horses are measured from the top of the withers, not the top of the head. But, what are withers?

The withers are where the horse's shoulders meet the spine, and the neck becomes the back. Withers are incredibly important for saddle placement, as a badly placed saddle in this area can prevent a horse from moving its legs properly, cause a large amount of pain, and even damage a horse's spine. Speaking of spines, this is a horse skeleton, with the withers pointed out.

Horses have four legs. Horses cannot have any fewer than four legs. They are obligate quadrupeds. This is, in part, due to their weight, as well as the construction of their legs and hooves. This is to say, that while cats, dogs, and other animals can be amputees, a horse, short of some incredible magic solution, cannot. Even a broken leg bone will cause a huge amount of problems, as all of the weight that leg would usually hold must be shifted to the other feet, and this causes a condition called laminitis, where the tissue that holds together the hoof and the toe bone becomes inflamed, and begins to separate. Once this happens, the hoof tissue dies from lack of blood, and the bone begins to rotate. This is extremely painful for the horse, and so often the best solution for a horse with a broken leg is to be spared that pain. Famous American racehorse Barbaro experienced a complex broken bone, which began to heal fine, but complications from laminitis in two of his other legs caused him to be put down. This is why media will almost always show a horse with a broken or injured leg being 'taken care of'.

^Barbaro, in his prime. Even the best veterinary medicine couldn't save him.

Now, racehorses like Barbaro are moving at the fastest speed and the fastest gait of the horse, the gallop. The patterns that horses move their feet are referred to as gaits, with most horses having four, with some breeds having five or more.

The first gait and the slowest is the walk. In the walk, all four feet move independently, which leads it to be called a four-beat gait, as the footfalls make a sort of drumbeat on the ground.

The next gait is the trot, a two beat gait with diagonal pairs of legs moving together.

^Diagonal pairs marked in red and blue

The trot is a very bouncy experience for the rider, and can be uncomfortable. Some riders will rise and fall with a pair of diagonal legs, called a posting trot, some will stand in their stirrups, called a two-point or jump position, and some will sit the trot, which requires a lot of core strength (seriously, if you want a strong core, screw the gym)

The third gait is the canter, a three-beat gait with a single diagonal pair. This gait is ridden sitting, and feels a lot like going over waves on a jetski. There is a rise, a scoop, and a fall feeling. The canter is also called a lope in Western riding, they are the same gait.

^diagonal pair marked in red

A gallop is sometimes considered a variation on canter, as it is similar save for the legs actually moving in a four-beat pattern. As you can see with the image of Barbaro, all four of his feet are moving in different patterns, at different times, even though the gallop is really a four beat version of the canter. Riders in the gallop rise off the horse's back into a raised position, which allows the horse to use the full length of its spine and musculature to get as much reach and speed as possible. It feels like riding on top of a train barreling down the tracks, at least until your horse takes an unexpected turn and the ground is suddenly the only thing you're riding.

^ I've been there. The trick is to push away and hit the ground rolling, it hurts less that way. And don't land on your head.

That's all for this post. I'll have more when I feel like it, and send me questions if you want to know more about specific things or need a writing question answered

Reblogs welcome and encouraged

@jacqueswriteblrlibrary for wider reach

[theexhaustedmermaid]

Also note, you can't continually gallop because it exhaust the horse. Most can only gallop 1-2 miles before slowing down.

And you bring horses to a farrier for shoes and hoofcare, not a blacksmith.

[theprissythumbelina]

So you want to write about horses.

Or you're writing and horses show up. Or its a pre-industrial fantasy and your characters have to get somewhere. Or you have a faint idea of your MC's love interest showing up on a white stallion.

Whatever the cause, you're writing, and a horse appears. But you know nothing about horses. I can help.

This is a horse. Horses come in many sizes.

^ Big Jake, a Belgian Draft horse, and a roughly 5 foot woman for scale.

1 hand = 4 inches = 10.16 cm

Once a horse is smaller than about 14.2hh, it is generally considered a pony. In the modern day, ponies are not considered suitable for adult riders due to weight and height issues. Some pony breeds, such as Welsh, Fjords, ect. are known for being sturdy, and can more easily carry adult sized humans. Miniature horses should never be ridden by adults.

^The only suitable 'riding' a miniature horse should do

The above graphic mentions that horses are measured from the top of the withers, not the top of the head. But, what are withers?

The withers are where the horse's shoulders meet the spine, and the neck becomes the back. Withers are incredibly important for saddle placement, as a badly placed saddle in this area can prevent a horse from moving its legs properly, cause a large amount of pain, and even damage a horse's spine. Speaking of spines, this is a horse skeleton, with the withers pointed out.

Horses have four legs. Horses cannot have any fewer than four legs. They are obligate quadrupeds. This is, in part, due to their weight, as well as the construction of their legs and hooves. This is to say, that while cats, dogs, and other animals can be amputees, a horse, short of some incredible magic solution, cannot. Even a broken leg bone will cause a huge amount of problems, as all of the weight that leg would usually hold must be shifted to the other feet, and this causes a condition called laminitis, where the tissue that holds together the hoof and the toe bone becomes inflamed, and begins to separate. Once this happens, the hoof tissue dies from lack of blood, and the bone begins to rotate. This is extremely painful for the horse, and so often the best solution for a horse with a broken leg is to be spared that pain. Famous American racehorse Barbaro experienced a complex broken bone, which began to heal fine, but complications from laminitis in two of his other legs caused him to be put down. This is why media will almost always show a horse with a broken or injured leg being 'taken care of'.

^Barbaro, in his prime. Even the best veterinary medicine couldn't save him.

Now, racehorses like Barbaro are moving at the fastest speed and the fastest gait of the horse, the gallop. The patterns that horses move their feet are referred to as gaits, with most horses having four, with some breeds having five or more.

The first gait and the slowest is the walk. In the walk, all four feet move independently, which leads it to be called a four-beat gait, as the footfalls make a sort of drumbeat on the ground.

The next gait is the trot, a two beat gait with diagonal pairs of legs moving together.

^Diagonal pairs marked in red and blue

The trot is a very bouncy experience for the rider, and can be uncomfortable. Some riders will rise and fall with a pair of diagonal legs, called a posting trot, some will stand in their stirrups, called a two-point or jump position, and some will sit the trot, which requires a lot of core strength (seriously, if you want a strong core, screw the gym)

The third gait is the canter, a three-beat gait with a single diagonal pair. This gait is ridden sitting, and feels a lot like going over waves on a jetski. There is a rise, a scoop, and a fall feeling. The canter is also called a lope in Western riding, they are the same gait.

^diagonal pair marked in red

A gallop is sometimes considered a variation on canter, as it is similar save for the legs actually moving in a four-beat pattern. As you can see with the image of Barbaro, all four of his feet are moving in different patterns, at different times, even though the gallop is really a four beat version of the canter. Riders in the gallop rise off the horse's back into a raised position, which allows the horse to use the full length of its spine and musculature to get as much reach and speed as possible. It feels like riding on top of a train barreling down the tracks, at least until your horse takes an unexpected turn and the ground is suddenly the only thing you're riding.

^ I've been there. The trick is to push away and hit the ground rolling, it hurts less that way. And don't land on your head.

That's all for this post. I'll have more when I feel like it, and send me questions if you want to know more about specific things or need a writing question answered

Reblogs welcome and encouraged

@jacqueswriteblrlibrary for wider reach

[illarian-rambling]

Yay, unsolicited advice time! Or, not really advice, more like miscellaneous tips and tricks, because if there's one thing eight years of martial arts has equipped me to write, it's fight scenes.

.

Fun things to add to a fight scene (hand to hand edition)

It's not uncommon for two people to kick at the same time and smack their shins together, or for one person to block a kick with their shin. This is called a shin lock and it HURTS like a BITCH. You can be limping for the rest of the fight if you do it hard enough.

If your character is mean and short, they can block kicks with the tip of their elbow, which hurts the other guy a lot more and them a lot less

Headbutts are a quick way to give yourself a concussion

If a character has had many concussions, they will be easier to knock out. This is called glass jaw.

Bad places to get hit that aren't the groin: solar plexus, liver, back of the head, side of the thigh (a lot of leg kicks aim for this because if it connects, your opponent will be limping)

Give your character a fighting style. It helps establish their personality and physicality. Are they a grappler? Do they prefer kicks or fighting up close? How well trained are they?

Your scalp bleeds a lot and this can get in your eyes, blinding you

If you get hit in the nose, your eyes water

Adrenaline's a hell of a drug. Most of the time, you're not going to know how badly you've been hurt until after the fact

Even with good technique, it's really easy to break toes and fingers

Blocking hurts, dodging doesn't

.

Just thought these might be useful! If you want a more comprehensive guide or a weapons edition, feel free to ask. If you want, write how your characters fight in the comments!

Have a bitchin day <3

[freizusein]

Fellow martial artist here (who has been doing full body contact fights, also competitive ones). Hope you do not mind me adding on OP!

I love this post so much & I can confirm all of this 100%. ESPECIALLY the shin & toes stuff. During my roughly one year of doing active competition, I broke four toes, I badly hurt two of my fingers, and my shins (despite wearing shin protection during the competition fights) were black and blue all the time. Smacking shins or feet against each other when both opponents try to kick simultaneously hurts like a bitch (like, instant eyes watering level for me tbh) and happens SO MUCH MORE OFTEN than you might realize. Actually, all of the here above mentioned broken toes happened BECAUSE of kicks colliding. Broken toes might of course occur less when the opponents wear shoes (and in most martial arts trainings & competition you do fight barefoot, so...) however with soft shoes colliding with a lot of force this might still happen anyways. The only real protection against this would be strong leather- or steel-capped shoes, I guess, but you need to be mighty strong (or mighty dumb) to throw kicks (or at least kicks above the knee of your opponent) with the latter in an actual self-defense situation.

(Also, regarding dodging, it not only hurts less but if used with good technique and footwork, it can maneuvre you (the dodger) in a much better attack position or give you an opening to a weak spot of your opponent)

[fancakeofficial]

Green Rider: Unspoken by hermitknut

Posted by: birdylion Fandom: Green Rider Pairings/Characters: Zachary Hillander; Amilton Hillander, Laren Mapstone, Original Characters Rating: Teen And Up Audiences Length: 19319 words Creator Links: hermitknut Theme: Pre-Canon; Small Fandoms, Book Fandoms, Family, Gen, Hurt/Comfort, Worldbuilding & Logistical Fix-It, Gateway Fanworks Summary: Two boys come of age in Sacor City Keep, one kept quiet in the shadows of the other. But after all, how important could a second son be? Content Notes: Deals with child abuse / child neglect done to the POV character, who in the course of the story gets all the support and help. Canon Divergence in the epilogue / chapter 4. Reccer’s Notes: This is a wonderful story about an abused and neglected kid getting support and help. It’s a story about how those who want to rule over others are the most unfit for the role and vice versa. It’s a story about familial love. Very much a comfort-read. ( Visit this post at Dreamwidth for more notes on the theme tags)

Fanwork Links: Unspoken on ao3

comments & original content @ fancake

[elumish]

Some Things To Consider When Writing Weapons Training

Your character will hurt. Even if they don't get hit, it can be exhausting training, especially if they're just starting. It can be a weird set of muscles to use, and things like their shoulders will hurt if they do what a lot of people do and tense up while holding the weapon.

They will drop the weapon. There are a lot of reasons why people drop weapons--because the weapon is awkward to hold or the person isn't used to holding them, because it gets hit out of the person's hand, because their own hand gets hit, etc--but it happens.

People get hit by accident all the time--including the person holding the weapon. When I've done jō practice, I consider it a success if I don't hit myself with it while I'm practicing. And even when doing controlled sparring or paired katas, people still end up hitting each other, especially on places like the hand.

Practice weapons still hurt. Depending on what you're doing, they're usually made of either wood or rubber rather than metal, but just because they're not metal, it doesn't mean they don't hurt. Bruises are really standard, especially if you're practicing something like knife fighting where you're doing a lot of hand-to-hand blocking.

The goal of training is not to hurt your opponent. People who (intentionally or through carelessness) hurt their sparring partners are bad at training and will probably be kicked out of it or at least get a very strong talking to. Good training will also teach them how to train without getting hurt and strongly discourage doing things in a dangerous way.

What they wear will differ widely depending on the discipline. HEMA and fencing tend to have a fair amount of protective gear (helmet, etc.), as does kendo, while disciplines like aikidō, iaidō, and jūjutsu are more likely to have people wearing a gi or hakama. This will impact how they feel about hitting opponents--it's always riskier to hit someone in a place with no protective gear.

Some weapons' training is primarily defensive, and some is primarily offensive, and some is both. Some training (knife defense, gun defense) is primarily about disarming someone with one of those weapons, where the actual use of the weapon is just as a training tool. In those cases, the specifics of the attack are usually emphasized less than the specifics of the defense. HEMA and fencing are much more offense-focused, with the goal being more about landing a hit. In forms like that (or in a similar fictional form), you'll see the mentality that the best defense is a good offense, as opposed to the mentality that the best defense is a good defense (or the best defense is running away).

Knowing one form of weapons training is (often) helpful in learning another. Even while they differ a fair amount, different weapons styles can often use similar patterns in terms of strikes, blocks, and steps. Part of this is that there are only so many useful places to hit a person and only so many ways to step. There are other things that are fairly universal as well, like awareness of your blade and your opponent's blade, awareness of your body, and awareness of relative distance.

[howtofightwrite]

So second question. Quarterstaffs are a lot more dangerous than people realize right? Like…big long sticks with a bit more weight on one end are remarkably effective weapons. But my question is this…how risky is it to actually fight an armed opponent with one?

Because I’d imagine if you’re fighting someone say armed with a sword that the blade could slide down the staff and cut into your fingers or someone with a spear (which is essentially just a quarterstaff with a sharp pointy bit on the end) could potentially just whack yours out the way and stab you with it. That’s saying nothing about an armored opponent.

Would a metal quarterstaff be an effective weapon against armor? I seriously doubt a wooden one would be…then again if you had metal coating on one end or a little ball that probably ruin someone’s day should you whack them with it now wouldn’t it…hm.

Anyway, quarterstaffs. Good weapon or no? Also potential upsides to wood Vs metal staffs? Or potentially mixed staffs with mostly wood and metal bits…I’m rambling anyway bye

The staff is the parent of all polearms. The OG. The GOAT. Spawner of a billion martial styles in cultures and countries all over the world and remains a foundational part of many of them. It is also the parent of the sword. Many versions of the sword, especially early versions and two handed versions, share the same strike patterns and work off the same principles. If your character knows how to use a sword, they were more than likely trained to use a staff first.

For martial traditions, the staff is Baby’s first weapon. Is it a good weapon?

Oh, yes.

Is it risky to fight one?

Yes, it is risky to fight someone wielding a staff. While staves are most often overlooked by the general (mostly American) public due to their simplicity, they can be a very dangerous weapon. They can break bones, smash heads, knock loose teeth, bust internal organs, and they leave pretty deep bruises even with light or accidental training injuries. The most common staff training injury involves smashed fingers. Lots, and lots, and lots of smashed fingers. The strike pattern is also simple, easy to learn, and perfectly viable for self-defense without knowing more advanced techniques or having the luxury of devoting a lot of time to practice.

Staves (like the bow and the spear) are paleolithic weapons. Every culture on earth has their own version. The staff has combat applications that survive to this day due to their versatility and ease of use. They’re cheap(ish) to make compared to alternatives, easy to learn, ridiculously effective, and capable of holding off multiple opponents at once. (This includes people wielding swords.) Due to the lengthy period of time where they remained peak, it’s not a stretch to say staves are the most commonly used if not the most popular self-defense weapon in human history.

If you get outside American media, you’ll see staff weapons get a lot more prominent as a weapon of use because of the strong martial traditions associated with them. They’re also extremely prominent in myth. The staff really is the commoner’s weapon, which is probably the reason American fantasy tradition ignores it.

I’m not sure if you came into this question thinking quarterstaff meant all staves, or if your question specifically relates to quarterstaves. However, since you specified the quarterstaff, we’ll stick with that one. (There are other variants. They are legion.)

The quarterstaff is the English version from the Middle Ages. The name denotes a specific type of staff, usually about an inch in diameter and between six to nine feet in length. The quarter refers to “hand position” which would be about quarter up the length, and where the staff was held in this particular martial style. The quarterstaff is a short staff in medieval tradition, long staves were between eleven to twelve feet in length.

These were solid wood, usually cut from oak or yew. They’re not brittle. If that wasn’t enough, the ends were often also shod with iron. So, yeah… Yay, blunt force trauma. You could use quarterstaves against armored opponents, but there are better tools.

Staff Combat

You don’t normally swing a staff outside having a specific reason to hold it with one hand at the end to fully maximize its reach in a wide arc. You give up a ton of control to do this, and that makes it a risky move.

The staff is a weapon of leverage. You rotate it into forward strikes with your back hand, while using the front hand midway up the weapon as the guide. This allows the wielder to strike with both ends by using the back hand as a fulcrum. The basic strike pattern is an X, also across the body on either side, down on the head, up through the groin, you can thrust forward, and you can shoot the staff forward too. Shooting is basically throwing it with your back hand through your loosened grip to gain greater momentum and force when the front end strikes the opponent. It’s a controlled, short-range throw where the weapon never truly leaves your hands.

Hand position changes and adjusts on the shaft depending on how you’re using it. If you’re predominantly utilizing the front end for quicker, smaller movements and more precise strikes, the hands will be set wider apart with one in the middle and one closer to the end. If you’re planning to transition with strikes between the front and back ends, your hands will be closer together and utilize the shaft’s central balance point. This isn’t an either or, you can shift between positions and strike patterns in combat, which is part of the staff’s versatility as a weapon.

Due to the staff’s reach, the whole of your opponent’s body from their feet to their head is available as a target. Don’t discount the power of exterior strikes to the limbs, especially the joints. Most combat strategies start outward and work inward as the opponent’s defense begins to break.

The strike pattern occurs in simple strikes (tip forward or diagonal or side and back to hit again) or in a figure eight as you transition the weapon into various defensive blocks and strikes while moving it across in front of (or, more rarely, behind) your body.

Due to being able to use both ends, you can gain 360 degrees of protection without having to adjust your stance, your grip, or where you’re pointing the bladed end. This, in addition to its range, is why the staff is a better weapon than the sword for defending against multiple opponents.

Don’t swing. Rotate. Sweep. Strike. The staff doesn’t need big moves to generate force because the force of the strike is focused into the tip. Traditional staff combat maintains the same narrow focus around the body’s center that sword combat does. You can, for example, fight with a staff in a narrow corridor. It’s not ideal, but it’s doable and the staff is perfectly capable of maintaining your advantage over an opponent with a shorter weapon or no weapon at all. If you’re imagining the large, controlled spins of some Chinese martial arts, it’s important to remember that those staves are largely made from bamboo and different materials create different combat styles. Oak is, pardon the euphemism, stiff wood. It’s heavier.

The staff is also very fast because of the rotation of the back hand, deals a lot of force, and one never has to worry about maintaining an edge.

In simple terms when thinking about using a staff: block with the front end, then rotate the staff over across your body and clock your opponent across the face with the back end. Then rotate it over again and hit your opponent on the head or, don’t bother and thrust it into their face.

The Quarterstaff versus the Sword

With weapons, it’s important to remember that the concept isn’t about which does the most damage but which tool is the right or most effective tool for the job. Every weapon has situations where they shine and situations where they don’t. It’s contextual.

The staff has an advantage over the sword in one-on-one combat. Sometimes, if historical records are to be believed, in three on one combat. However, every weapon is dangerous in combat. This isn’t rock beats scissors. Disadvantages can be overcome.

For swords cutting through staves, think about it like trying to cut down a tree with a pocket knife. It’s not going to happen. Sword’s edge will nick or get stuck in the wood, so it’s not going to easily slide down to cut fingers. That’s if the sword edge can get into range to reach the fingers. Like all staves, the quarterstaff is a weapon where grip adjustment easily changes both reach and fighting style.

The medieval longsword runs between three to four feet. The quarterstaff is six to nine, and probably, most commonly, between seven to eight. If you transition to hold it at the end like one would a spear and primarily thrust, the reach advantage is maximized.

It isn’t necessary to do that, though. It’s combat where only one side has to worry about maintaining their edge, but that edge is still dangerous if they get close enough. Both are still going to be striking on the same angles and using the same circles.

Take the weapon out of the way and come back across into the strike.

The Spear vs The Quarterstaff

This is just staff combat where one has a pointy, bladed bit on the end and the other doesn’t. There’s actually not an extreme advantage here, though the wielder with the spear is probably going to prioritize their point for striking.

These two really aren’t different weapons. More likely to see smashed hands here.

Metal Staves

They exist. I don’t know if they existed in England though. They never gained popularity over the wooden ones because they’re more resource intensive and wood works better than fine anyway. Solid steel or hollow steel vibrate more than wood. One of the major considerations of staff combat is vibration. The weapon vibrates on contact which wears out your muscles and is hard on your grip. (You know, in case you thought constant movement was the only part that’d wear you out.) This is one of the side effects about not worrying over maintaining the sword edge. You can clang staves together the way you can’t with edged weapons, and that leads to a lot more vibration over a shorter period of time.

Staves with Metal Balls on the End

These also exist. They’re found on other polearm variants specifically designed to go after opponents in armor.

Every weapon has a place where it shines, and a place where it doesn’t.

So, where are staves outshone by swords and spears?

Warfare. Specifically, in military combat. They’re better at one-on-one combat and self-defense. There are just better, more specialized tools for military combat.

There is no best weapon. There’s just the right tool for the situation or circumstance. You can certainly take a staff into combat with an armored opponent (people did) and be successful, but there are better tools for the job. Spears are a better ground weapon in terms of attacking in formation, they work well when combined with a shield, and are a better defense against cavalry.

The irony about the sword is that it’s the original sidearm, it isn’t meant to be the primary weapon, and it is for close range fighting. So, it’s a great weapon when you’re packed into a tight melee, don’t have a lot of room, and need a weapon that works well without requiring a lot of space to build momentum. It’s also easy to carry around if you’re planning to sit down to dinner. It doesn’t take up a lot of space.

By reframing how you think about weapons from “does X amount of damage” like video games have trained us to do and think about them as contextually relevant, you’ll have a better understanding of how and why certain weapons were relevant and how they gained prominence throughout history.

-Michi

This blog is supported through Patreon. Patrons get early access to new posts, and direct access to us through Discord. If you’d like to support us, please consider becoming a Patron.