Jak je to relevantní čím se živím? Vávra také dělá něco jiného.
Ano, psal že to četl, ale IMHO nedočetl studii ke conclusion nebo neví jak to interpretovat, protože tam není o ponících ani slovo a on prostě jenom hystericky reagoval a shazuje studii které nerozumí. Toto je ten hlavní závěr na který on prostě nereaguje:
"Despite the tendency for both historians and zooarchaeologists to focus on the overall size of past horses, the results of these analyses suggest that neither size, nor limb bone robusticity alone, are enough to confidently identify warhorses in the archaeological record. As the historical record indicates by remaining notably silent on the specific criteria which defined a warhorse, it is much more likely that throughout the medieval period, at different times, different conformations of horses were desirable in response to changing battlefield tactics and cultural preferences. The breeding and training of warhorses instead was influenced by a combination of biological and cultural factors, as well as individual behavioural characteristics of the horses themselves such as temperament. This work has highlighted avenues for further exploration into the biological and functional characteristics of equids used in combat. For instance, detailed examination of the morphological variation of the lower limb bones as well as associated entheseal changes has the potential to decipher these biological trends further and aid in the identification of archaeological warhorses. Furthermore, the incorporation of ancient DNA analyses presents the possibility of uniting ancestry related changes and the impact of the introduction of European horse breeds on English stock, whereas advances in ancient genomics allows detection of traits previously unidentifiable from archaeological bone, including coat colour, speed and temperament. Finally, and perhaps most significantly, the contexts of horse remains must be considered for the identification of warhorses. Given the different depositional processes for horses from other domesticates, as well as the tendency for horse carcasses to regularly go through postmortem processing, the search for the ‘great horse’ must move from castles and battlefields to knackers' yards and domestic middens."
reaguje na:
Memphis
816480
Jak je to relevantní čím se živím? Vávra také dělá něco jiného.
Ano, psal že to četl, ale IMHO nedočetl studii ke conclusion nebo neví jak to interpretovat, protože tam není o ponících ani slovo a on prostě jenom hystericky reagoval a shazuje studii které nerozumí. Toto je ten hlavní závěr na který on prostě nereaguje:
"Despite the tendency for both historians and zooarchaeologists to focus on the overall size of past horses, the results of these analyses suggest that neither size, nor limb bone robusticity alone, are enough to confidently identify warhorses in the archaeological record. As the historical record indicates by remaining notably silent on the specific criteria which defined a warhorse, it is much more likely that throughout the medieval period, at different times, different conformations of horses were desirable in response to changing battlefield tactics and cultural preferences. The breeding and training of warhorses instead was influenced by a combination of biological and cultural factors, as well as individual behavioural characteristics of the horses themselves such as temperament. This work has highlighted avenues for further exploration into the biological and functional characteristics of equids used in combat. For instance, detailed examination of the morphological variation of the lower limb bones as well as associated entheseal changes has the potential to decipher these biological trends further and aid in the identification of archaeological warhorses. Furthermore, the incorporation of ancient DNA analyses presents the possibility of uniting ancestry related changes and the impact of the introduction of European horse breeds on English stock, whereas advances in ancient genomics allows detection of traits previously unidentifiable from archaeological bone, including coat colour, speed and temperament. Finally, and perhaps most significantly, the contexts of horse remains must be considered for the identification of warhorses. Given the different depositional processes for horses from other domesticates, as well as the tendency for horse carcasses to regularly go through postmortem processing, the search for the ‘great horse’ must move from castles and battlefields to knackers' yards and domestic middens."
816478
|
reagují:
Memphis
|
reagovat
|
