Horses Domesticated 9,000 Years Ago.

There is a difference between how much they can carry, and how long they can carry it.

For any kind of distance, the general limit of a llama is around 50 pounds. While some more modern hearty breeds can certainly carry 100 pounds and more, the wild llamas native to the Andes can carry much less, about half as much.

And there is speed to consider. A lightly loaded llama can walk at about 3-4 mph. Heavily loaded, their speed drops to around 1.5 mph. And remember, this was a neolithic culture, where the majority of goods moved were either small high value items (feathers, beads, shells), or large low weight but bulky items (grain, fibers, wool). The first type of commerce does not have much need for a pack animal, and the second is not utilized very much, other then for short distances.

 

seriously what person is going to carry a pack when a llama will do it for you?

which their advantage, they're perfectly suited for the environment in which they live, poor nutrition included a horse won't do as well...

having watched a documentary on llama's not to long ago I know they had no issues making a long journey...and distance is relative to terrain, 20 miles on a flat terrain is good days work, 20 miles in steep rugged mountain terrain at altitude is exceptionally difficult for man or beast...

people ate dogs and still do, the chinese raised dogs for food and the inuit also ate their dogs, korean still eat dogs...

 

When time is a major consideration. When suitable forage is not available. When your overhead does not cover the care required for pack animals.

True, but you still need to take time out for them to forage for food. And they will need to rest roughly 1 day in 3.

Suppose you have to travel 150 miles, and your daily distance is 20 miles. Two groups leave, each carrying 100 pounds of flax. The first is 3 men, the second is 1 man and 2 llamas.

Day One, both 20 miles into the trip.
Day Two, both 40 miles into the trip.
Day Three, both 60 miles into the trip.
Day Four, group one is now 80 miles into the trip, group 2 is resting and taking care of their animals.
Day Five, group one is now 100 miles, group 2 is 80 miles.
Day Six, group one is now 120 miles, group 2 is 100 miles.
Day Seven, group 1 is now 140 miles, group 2 is now 120 miles.
Day Eight, group 1 arrives in time for lunch, group 2 is resting their animals again.
Day Nine, group 1 is selling their goods, buying new goods, and resting. Group 2 has traveled 140 miles.
Day Ten, group 1 has left and has made 20 miles towards their next destination, group 2 finally arrives in town. They find the prices offered for their goods are lower, since most of the demand was met the day prior.

See the difference? Remember, we are discussing a neolithic culture. And slaves are remarkably common and cheap. This is why in a great many such cultures, things like pack animals and machinery were much later to develop. It was just cheaper and easier to have humans do it for you. And do you really care if your slave is miserable?

I am not questioning their ability at all. It is just that until the infrastructure was in place by more advanced civilizations, there was simply no need for any kind of large scale transport. Most traders in neolithic America were only 1-4 people, carrying what they could on their backs. And for the most part, over short distances. There was little need for larger groups, because of the lack of need for moving more goods.

In North America, there was little need because the natives largely used water transport. Who needs a pack animal, when you can move even more weigh faster and more efficiently by canoe or raft?

In the Aztec capitol of Tenochtitlan, this was also the case. Food was raised in vast quantity in the outlying regions, then moved to the city not by man or pack animals, but by reed rafts.

 

you're making lots of assumptions to make your hypothesis fit, you're assuming all excursions are 10 days long..or that they will need to travel more than 3 days in total...or that prices will be in that much daily flux...

a couple of misconceptions, slaves were never cheap and they had much higher nutritional needs than herbivores...and how well they were treated varied greatly from one society to the next...prisoners of war are a different matter if the sole intention is to sacrifice them or use them for entertainment(kill) because there isn't a huge investment in food to keep them alive...slaves kept for work/service was expensive and not practical for most, they're an expensive investment you look after their needs...

still no reason not to use them, if you need to move something 20 or 3o km you're still going to use a llama rather than carry it yourself...

there were no pack animals other than dogs until the introduction of horses, they used the horse as soon as they were available, horses far more versatile than a canoe...rivers can still be hundreds of km apart and don't always take you in the direction you want to go, they did a lot of walking...

I don't think there were pack animals available either so humans were the default system of transport...and capital was an island in the wetlands so there was no need...

 

I was giving a single example of the Americas, but there are others on other continents.

In Europe, the Vikings were superb traders. And the Viking Longboat was simply an adaptation of their trading craft. Shallow draft, easy portage, and able to be used on lakes, rivers, or coastal areas. In addition, they could be operated by wind or oar.

Most coastal cultures developed some rather sophisticated ships. The Phonecians used Galleys, and are credited with inventing the Bireme. In India, the Coracle evolved into quite a large vessel.

While most people tend to think of Arabs as useing camels across the desert for trade, their real history is of nautical traders. Anybody that remembers Sinbad should know that.

 

Oh they used camels.. They also used Dhows.

Camels were great for hauling, spices, salt, pearls and dates north to Egypt and Babylon. Both Petra and Madain Saleh were caravan cities.

 

Oh, I am well aware of that. I got to visit a dhow in Doha a few years ago.

But all to many people think of Arabs and only think of camels. They totally ignore their rich naval tradition and history as well.

 

Well Yeah .. they invented one of the very first navigation instruments... a Kamal. Useful on the desert while traveling by the starts too.

Dhows are cool.. Used to take Dhow daytrips to Tarut Island.

 

Sinbad aye!

they did extensive sailing from china down to cape of africa

 

then there were the chinese with advanced ship designs, strangely they never felt a need to explore, I guess since they were wealthy and everyone was trying to reach to trade why bother... leaving....

 

Actually they did explore.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zheng_He

Voyages of Zheng He or Voyages of Cheng Ho from 1405 to 1433

He was a Mulim.

Zheng He's fleets visited Arabia, Brunei, East Africa, India, Maritime Southeast Asia and Thailand, dispensing and receiving goods along the way.[14] Zheng He presented gifts of gold, silver, porcelain and silk; in return, China received such novelties as ostriches, zebras, camels, ivory and a giraffe.

While Zheng He's fleet was unprecedented (compared to previous voyages from China to the east Indian Ocean), the routes were not. Zheng He's fleet was following long-established, well-mapped routes.

Sea-based trade links had existed between China and the Arabian peninsula since the Han Dynasty (there being trade with the Roman Empire at that time.) During the Three Kingdoms, the king of Wu sent a diplomatic mission along the coast of Asia, reaching as far as the Eastern Roman Empire. During the Song Dynasty, there was large scale maritime trade from China reaching as far as the Arabian peninsula and East Africa.[16]

(There is some indication that he also visited the Americas)

 

that wasn't exploring, they already knew those places existed through established trades routes...

exploring is going into the unknown...

 

If you check it out.. there is considerable evidence that the Chinese "navy" explored the coastal Americas as early as 1421.

 

I have, my daughter is an archeologist/historian, I think may have mentioned that...she actually gave a book on the issue(which is beside me as I type)...there is zero evidence he reached the atlantic or the americas...all the evidence is based on one speculative book, that's grown into an urban myth...

the book is called Frauds,Myths,Mysteries-Science and Pseudoscience in Archeology...Kenneth L Feder

 

The three Set in place Trilithon stones(Temple of Jupiter/Baalbek) are ALL over 1000 ton (With most heavy one estamated between 1100 & 1400 tons

 

what's your point...interesting archeological finds or claims of alien construction...

 

Which do you ascribe too ?

 

A group of three horizontally lying giant stones which form part of the podium of the Roman Jupiter temple of Baalbek, Lebanon, go by the name "trilithon". Weighing ca. 800 tons each, they are among the largest ancient monoliths and even of the whole of history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trilithon

Got a better verifyable reference?

 

Than Wiki ? How bout you get a second source .

 

The Trilithon stones pre-date the lilipution Roman ruins (Built on top of them)by thousands of years...

 

my first search says they're possibly roman(doubtful IMO it's not their style)...and the largest is an estimated 1,200tons and was never moved, it was cut where it was found....i'll look into some more this the first I've heard of these...

 

using wiki as a source draws an automatic fail at any respectable university, it's to easily edited by people who aren't qualified or have a political/religious axe to grind...using wiki as a lead to other legit sources is okay...

 

people don't need aliens to do amazing things....but if you want to make a lot of money write a book about it linking it to aliens and it'll be a best seller...

 

http://www.middleeast.com/baalbeck.htm

Baalbeck from Lebanon



Some of the ruins at Baalbeck are far older than the Roman ruins..

Baalbeck may mean God of the Bekka Valley

http://sacredsites.com/middle_east/lebanon/baalbek.html

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.horsetalk.co.nz/features/...gins-191.shtml

Discovery points to roots of arabian breed

August 28, 2011

Discoveries from the remains of a 9000-year-old civilisation in Saudi Arabia may point to the very roots of the Arabian horse breed.

(snip)

mong more than 80 artifacts found at Al-Magar is a one-metre long statue of a horse, comprising head, neck and chest.

Officials say the statue, which could well be the largest known sculpture of a horse during that period, has features similar to that of the original Arabian horses, characterised by a long neck and unique head shape.

The head of the statue carries what officials say are clear signs of a bridle.