Talk:Shire horse

British English

Have changed "draft" to "draught" which I think is the British spelling - the article seems to suggest that the Shire horse is a British breed (at least originally) so this spelling to probably to be preferred (unless there are general Wikipedia rules to the contrary). MightyWarrior 14:58, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Ancestry

There is some doubt that the Shire was descended from the Medieval great horse, so the wording should perhaps be changed to reflect that. See Horses in the Middle Ages#Breeding of medieval horses for a presentation of the debate. Gwinva 18:38, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I've never read or seen any actual evidence that the Medieval "great horse" resembled the modern Shire horse. It seems to be an assumption, but there is no bloodline or contemporary artwork to support it. "Great" just meant "the big one not the small one" among the knight's personal horses. If anyone knows of any contemporary material, it should be included here (please). 212.159.59.41 (talk) 21:57, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

The article does not claim resemblance, only a possible/probable hypothesis that ancestral stock may have in part been these horses. And it is sourced to a reliable source. If you think it needs to be changed, I suggest looking for studies saying otherwise. Indeed. Montanabw^(talk) 00:15, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Ancestry II

G, you've got the research, go ahead and fix the ancestry bits with excruciatingly careful NPOV. Basically use a form of "some people (source) say this, but there is some controversy to this claim because other people (source) say that..." Try to do it in a way not to tick off the Shire breeders too much. <grin> Montanabw 02:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Not wanting to step on anyone's toes, I left the above message, so someone else could do it!! But you're right...I've got the refs. Some time...Gwinva 09:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Attention other editors: If you want to do this, or have time to do this, contact me or Gwinva for source materials and ideas! Montanabw 03:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Biggest?

There are some bigger horses. http://www.ruralheritage.com/horse_paddock/horse_large.htm —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 148.81.137.4 (talk • contribs) 14:54, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

This link supports the information given! Owain.davies 13:29, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Merge

What's the rationale for the proposed merge? I'd like to see them kept as separate articles. Even if it has a place in Shire history, the Black is an extinct breed. A small reference could be made here if necessary, linking to the Black article. James (talk) 12:44, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Oppose - As James said, it is clearly a separate breed. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 20:49, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, all sources we have found indicate that the Black horse IS basically one of the ancestors of the Shire Horse and has no descendants in any other breed. The article on it, if you read it, also is short (about one paragraph) and unsourced. I am thinking that it could be moved over here almost in its entirety and made a part of the breed history of the Shire. I'm moving over the discussion that is on my talk page about it: We can discuss in more detail here (also was cluttering up my talk page) Montanabw^(talk) 04:17, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Black horse

Saw this: Old English Black, seems to be a type that developed mostly in the UK, and is definitely claimed as an ancestor of the Shire horse (you know, the great big huge things that claim descent from the Destrier. Also does not appear to be the Forest Horse nor the Black Forest Horse (but those are cool looking critters!) Anyway, thought you might want to eyeball it and see if any of your sources say anything about it. The article is crap, but I have run across many references to the "Black horse" or "Great Black Horse" in various horse breed and history articles. Be nice to clear this up. From the article, it isn't the Destrier, nor was it necessarily a Black (horse). But anyway, if you can add anything to the article, that would be cool. Thanks much! Montanabw^(talk) 05:14, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

It isn't a made up theory, I've come across it in passing in a number of places, but like our original discussion over the Destrier, there are assumptions that may not be necessarily so. Hence, why I call upon you. While the article is unreferenced, I don't think the article is too far off base from what passes for "common knowledge" (in fact, I wonder if it was an import from the public domain Britannica), just unsourced and not well-written. The Shire horse people defnitely claim it as an ancestor. Possibly it was a 17th or 18th century critter, maybe even 19th. Just hard to find anything. Am discovering that many "world horse breeds" books out there are unsourced and generally, well, suck. Montanabw^(talk) 00:02, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

There seemed little mention of breeds when I looked through my references initially, but I'll see what I can come up with. interesting, anyway. No sources at all on the page...so don't know where it comes from..someone's pet theory? Gwinva (talk) 19:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

how exciting: a subpage of my very own in your userspace! :-) Didn't realise I'd talked so much... Gwinva (talk) 03:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

it's a bit of a problem, actually. Hyland and others I have on my shelf make no mention of the Old Black (although discuss other breeds), and most of the stuff on the internet is equally unreferenced or self-referenced. You wouldn't believe the number of breed sites, local-show, local-history sites which regurgitate the same text most of which originated at Wikipedia. Soon, WP will have to stop allowing internet cites, since most of them take info from here. (Note to self: have a viewpoint to push? Original research? Hide it in an unreferenced Wikipedia article, wait six months, then google it: someone else will then have it on their web page). I couldn't be bothered trawling through all x-thousand of the references, but the first few dozen were enough to show they all reference each other (often using the same text). Google books also perpetuate the same: the story of the Old Black seems to have originated with a Henry Child Merwin in 1892 who, in the snippet available for view, says "authorities consider".... What we need is something that goes back to primary sources...like Hyland, who doesn't mention it. Ah-ugh! We can reference it...but whether that is reliable or "true" is another matter. Who knows? Gwinva (talk) 04:17, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Another way to look at it: the full OED (of which ann Hyland is a consultant on equestrian matters, incidentally). No entry for "Old Black", but under "Shire horse":

A horse of a heavy powerful breed, used for draught, chiefly bred in the midland counties of England. Also known as the Old English Black Horse.

1875 S. SIDNEY Bk. Horse xii. 268 The Shire Horse. 1877 Field 14 Apr. 447/3 The Shires or Old English Cart Horse. Ibid., Influential breeders of the Shires horse should combine together and [etc.]. [1888 SIR W. GILBEY Great Horse (1899) 52 Arthur Young, in the latter part of the last century,..mentions only two varieties of Cart Horse as deserving attention, namely, the Large Black Old English Horse, ‘the produce principally of the Shire counties in the heart of England and the Sorrel-coloured Suffolk Punch’.] 1891 Spectator 7 Mar. 340/1 The show of ‘Shire horses’, as the old breed of the English cart-horse is now generally called. attrib. 1877 Jrnl. R. Agric. Soc. 532 Those confined to the ‘Shire’ horse classes. 1887 Leamington Spa Courier 30 Apr. 1/6, 8 grand Shire Horse Colts and Fillies.

Note, the OED quotes the EARLIEST use of the word in English. So..nothing about the Shire before 1875. Searching for black horse (not a separate entry, but in other quotes) most are obviously adjectival uses, (ie the horse was simply black) but we have these: "1675 W. DUGDALE Baronage Eng. I. 186/2 Bequeathed..to her Sister, the Countess of Oxford, a Black Horse and a Nouch." (Nouch is a clasp). A breed or just a description? or: "1781 R. Georgia Gaz. 8 Mar. 4/2 (Advt.), A Black Horse, about 13 and an half hands high, half roach main [etc.]." But who knows if they refer to breed? The medieval books all state that horses were usually refered to by colour rather than breeding, anyway. So who knows. Gwinva (talk) 04:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

The "horse" of only 13.2 hh in that ad doesn't sound much like a Shire. It could almost walk beneath...--Richard New Forest (talk) 21:12, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. This makes me wonder if the Shire horse breed IS the Old English Black Horse. If you note the discussion I am having about the European Warmblood breeds above, there is a lot of "geographical location gives birth to breed names" even if the new "breed" is basically of the same genetic stock as the old breed, just maybe a different political faction taking charge of the stud book. Maybe I'll dig a bit into the history of the Shire horse. Montanabw^(talk) 17:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi. My understanding is that the Black Horse is indeed the original name for what became the Shire. It's certainly true that genuine black horses of other British breeds are rare, and if found in other breeds (most commonly piebald cobs) there's often some sign of Shire influence. I saw an ordinary New Forest mare the other day (out on her native habitat, of course) – she was a good black, and so was her foal, but even she had the very wide and rather asymmetrical blaze quite often seen in Shires (black is unusual in adult NFs, though greys are often born black). The Black Horse is a common pub name in the UK, though nowadays usually illustrated with a hot-blood type (but then Jolly Farmer signs always show a fat happy chap, not the more typical miserable one the name ironically refers to...). I can't remember at the moment how I know about the Black Horse/Shire thing, so I'll have to have a think. I've a couple of books which might have it in.--Richard New Forest (talk) 18:21, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Richard. I am going to put a merge tag on the articles, if you think they are the same breed, but wait for some sources to be sure we are not looking at a predecessor that was actually geneticially distinct (i.e. that the Shire as we know it today had additional blood added that dramatically changed the basic animal, for example, the Thoroughbred and the assorted warmblood breeds are most definitely NOT the same breed, though the Thoroughbred is an ancestor of all the warmbloods...). Let me know what you find, thanks. Montanabw^(talk) 02:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Here is one book: Stephen J G Hall and Juliet Clutton-Brock, Two Hundred Years of British Livestock, British Museum (Natural History), 1989, ISBN 0-56501077-8. Chapter 18: Heavy draught horses.

Page 225 (from chapter introduction):

Youatt in 1843 described three breeds, the Suffolk Punch, the Clydesdale, and the Heavy Black Horse, now known as the Shire.

(This secondary ref, not given in the otherwise very extensive bibliography, is presumably: William Youatt, The Horse, J S Skinner ed, New York: Leavitt and Allen Publishing, 1843.)

Page 226, opening para of Shire section:

In contrast to the well-established Suffolk breed, the work horses of the rest of England two hundred years ago did not conform to any type, except that black was a common colour and large size a feature. Robert Bakewell was one of several breeders whose development of the Black Horse of Leicestershire contributed to the new efficient Midlands type of Shire horse. Imports of big strong horses from the Low Countries brought about much of this improvement andit was the race with the easiest access to these stocks, the fenland type, which was early on noted for its great size. By 1800, using a combinnation of Bakewell's methods and imported stock, breeders had upgraded the horse of the Middle Ages to a competent work animal, which was, however, not named the Shire horse until quite late in the nineteenth century.

Same page, legend to illustration (the first part must be a quote from the painting label):

'The Old English Black Horse, Stallion, by Old Blacklegs, from a mare of the Dishley Breed; bred by Mr Broomes, at Ormiston, Derby.' This black stallion, painted by Shiels, was presumably descended from Bakewell's stock of black Leicester horses...

Irritatingly there is no source or date given for this particular painting (unlike for the many other pictures in the book). However, this site: [1] has a copy of it, showing it is a plate from a book published in 1842, and is actually by William Nicholson, after Shiels. Interestingly, this site: [2] has a slightly different version of the painting (the original?), attributed "'The Old English Black Horse', William Shiels c 1840". The latter painting is certainly the same horse, in an identical view but laterally flipped with a different sky. Looks like a Shire to me...

The Black Horse must indeed be the same thing as the Shire, and it looks as if it had developed from a landrace into a more formal breed before the name change. I'll see if I can find any other refs. --Richard New Forest (talk) 12:17, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Butting in here, I have a copy of Youatt, printed in the US in 1850, and on page 39 the editor (who is not Youatt, as this is a copy of Youatt's work that's been edited for publication in the US) describes the "Dray Horse" (that's the subtitle of the section) like this

Of the Heavy Black Dray Horse, but few have been imported into this country, and they do not seem likely to become favorites here. Mr. Youatt says of them: "The Heavy Black Horse is the last variety it may be necessary to notice. It is bred chiefly in the midland counties from Lincolnshire to Staffordshire. Many are brought up by the Surrey and Berkshire farmers at two years old -- and being worked moderately until they are four, earning their keep all the while, they are then sent to the London market and sold at a profit of ten or twelve percent."

From Types and Breeds of Farm Animals by Charles S. Plumb, a "professor of animal husbandry in the college of agriculture of the ohio state university", published in 1906. p. 124

During the past history it has been known in England as the "Great Horse", the "War Horse" , the "Cart Horse", "Old English Black Horse" "Giant Lincolnshire" and "Shire." The name "Large Black Old English Horse" was in use from the time of Oliver Cromwell to modern times.

Hope this helps. Ealdgyth | Talk 14:57, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Ale deliveries-

In the Ale Deliveries paragraph there is no mention of the most famous shire horses, The Budweiser Clydesdales of Anheuser Busch. Anheuser-Busch has one of the world's largest herds of Clydesdale horses and owns approximately 250 nationwide(America). The Wikimedia Foundation was founded and headquartered in the USA so why is there no mention of the best Clydesdales from America's brewery? 144.246.4.22 (talk) 00:27, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Lance Jackson

Um, see Clydesdale (horse). Shire horses are a totally different breed. To ask why we don't discuss the Budweiser Clydesdales in the Shire article would be like asking why no one mentions Lassie in an article about German Shepherds. Same general family of animal, but two completely different breeds. Hope this explains things. Montanabw^(talk) 02:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Ceremonial Duties

The section on the Shire's use in ceremonial duties is incorrect. The Household Cavalry drum horses are generally Clydesdales or Clydesdale crosses bred in Ireland. Constantine (a full Clydesdale) is now retired and resident at the Horses Trust Home of Rest for Horses in Speen, Princess Risborough alongside fellow retired Drum Horses Janus and Leonidis. Sparticus is very much still in service with the Household Cavalry but he is a Clydesdale cross and definately not a shire. --Timetrial (talk) 12:50, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite

Dana, I was harsher on this rewrite than most because the whole "draft horses came from war horses" thing is a common myth of draft horse breeders and also utter nonsense. Gwinva and I hashed this over for a year and a half in creating HIW and HIMA -- she led me kicking and screaming into an understanding of reality on the issue. So I really jumped all over the history section. There is a need to do significantly more research on the Old English Black, which appears to be the real ancestor of both the Clydesdale and the Shire, though that is a different issue for a different article. I also think the breed standards on color are absolutely ridiculous, so best to cite at each tag to which organization is claiming this stuff. (I suspect that Shires, like Clydes, actually carry sabino, not "roan", as Arabian breeders have the same problem with the same genetics. But if "roan," then that's double nuts because roan is a dominant! But I digress) I hope I didn't come across too mean or bitey here because your article rewrites overall have been excellent. But the history stuff here is, as Gwinva would put it, quite dodgy! But this is a major breed, and as such, we need to be extra careful. And FYI, I've seen several Shires out here, but never pulling a brewery wagon! (Though I should mention it to the local microbreweries...be good publicity and I know some folks with a nice team...LOL)! Montanabw^(talk) 05:50, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Most of the stuff on the early history of the breed isn't mine - it was already in the article and sourced, so I left it. I thought you or maybe Richard New Forest had put it in there. The whole first paragraph (actually, anything sourced to the Hart book) isn't mine, and I would have no problem with it being tossed. All of the breed standards stuff is referenced, but I'll toss in a few more duplicated cites. Dana boomer (talk) 13:50, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Didn't mean to be too harsh on you then! My bad. That said, that may have been the early, pre-HIW work of myself or something from Richard, but we disavow all knowledge of said edits now! I hadn't looked at this article in any depth for a long time. Feel free to toss anything iffy! LOL! Montanabw^(talk) 03:44, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm the person with Hart's The Book of the Heavy Horse. I didn't write the intro, though. Bogbumper (talk) 11:22, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

LOL! Anything you can add from that book with proper full citations (other than the "descended from the destrier" bit will help. Dana did a ton of much needed work to bring this article up to nice quality. I've just been spending too much time on the military horse stuff...Montanabw^(talk) 05:57, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Shire horse/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk) 22:51, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Will be adding queries below shortly. Miyagawa (talk) 22:51, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I've made a couple of copy edits, but these are my initial thoughts:

• Citations need to be placed following a punctuation mark. The first occurrence of cite #1 appears midway through a sentence. Can't see any other instances, but it might be worthwhile to double check.

On behalf of Dana (who did most of the work here, I just copyedit and annoy people! LOL!) I'll check these, but in some cases, the need legitimately arises because the cite only covers a portion of the sentence. I fixed the one you specifically noted with the addition of a comma, I didn't see any others, but if they exist, just holler! Montanabw^(talk) 23:48, 28 February 2010 (UTC) (MT BW)

Citations do not need to always come after punctuation. If punctuation is present, then they should come consistently either before or after, but if no punctuation is present (in the example of a reference in the middle of a sentence) then punctuation does not need to be added because of the citation. In many cases, references only cover portions of a statement, and so references can occasionally occur in the middle of a sentence with no adjoining punctuation. Dana boomer (talk) 01:00, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

• Do any of the cited books have online copies such as on Google Books? If so, adding the urls to the citation templates would be helpful.

• I'm sure that some of the books do have online copies, but I have no interest in adding them. I feel that they add unneeded bulk to the article, as due to differing international copyright laws many people can't access them anyway, and only use them when I have actually used the Google Book version as the reference. Dana boomer (talk) 01:00, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

• For the cited books, are there access dates, as these should also be added to the cite templates?

• Books do not need access dates. Just because the cite template has a field doesn't mean it needs to be (or should be) filled in. Dana boomer (talk) 01:00, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

• Images need ALT text.

Done. --MT BW

I see that Montana has already done this, and it is something I would have added at some point, but just as a note, alt text is not required for GA-class. For your future knowledge, if an editor refuses to add alt text (I've never seen this happen, but who knows), it is not grounds for failing or even holding an article. Dana boomer (talk) 01:00, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

• Is there any information regarding Shire Horses being used to pull canal barges in the UK? Just noticed there's an article regarding this at Horse-drawn boat, but it might be worthwhile a mention in the uses section.

I'll let Dana address this based on her access to sources, but I would have a possible concern with WP:UNDUE absent statistics on what breeds and in what numbers do this, etc.... Montanabw^(talk) 23:48, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

No worries, if there aren't any reliable sources then obviously the article shouldn't suffer for it.Miyagawa (talk) 00:11, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I have not seen any information on this in the sources I have so far had access to. I plan to at some point in the future do a deeper dig for sources to make sure the article is comprehensive before a FAC run, and if there has been a significant history of Shires in this work then it will be added to the article. Dana boomer (talk) 01:00, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Prose is generally good, don't have any issues with it. Let me know on my talk page when you've addressed these issues and I'll come have a look. Good work! Miyagawa (talk) 23:06, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Replies above. Will drop a note on Miyagawa's talk page. Dana boomer (talk) 01:00, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Also, Miyagawa, I want to add a sincere thank you for the review! I hope my replies above don't come off as too snarky or rude - I don't intend them to be but have had a long day and so may not be thinking as clearly as usual. Dana boomer (talk) 01:04, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Overall a good article, would be nice to see this one make it's way up to FA. Miyagawa (talk) 11:51, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Character

I remember reading on an information board at Wimpole Home Farm that the reason shires are often referred to as "gentle giants" was that after mechanisation, only the well-tempered ones probably survived to be bred from. Is there any truth in that? Bob talk 20:02, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I doubt that, horses with poor dispositions got canned even before mechanization, a dangerous horse is not a good thing to have when hitched to a plow. Especially an 18-hand horse that weighs close to a ton. I suspect they were bred for good dispositions long before the internal combustion engine was developed! :-) Montanabw^(talk) 00:23, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Dartmoor (pony) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 21:58, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Update

The UK breed standard had different measurements for geldings and stallions, and they have it in hands, so the "male/female" split didn't really work here. For this British breed, the standard was given in stone and kg; this is the first time I've run across the use of stone, so will open discussion of whether to use {{convert}} for pounds. I think use of the templates is appropriate here. Montanabw^(talk) 08:56, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Well, actually that's sort of exactly what "sexual dimorphism" means – when the males and females are distinguishably of different size, shape or colour. The standard makes clear that mares are expected to be not just smaller, but also morphologically quite distinct from males. However, tabulating the height values as you've done seems more or less to work – I'll do the same for the weights.

The over-conversion of units throughout the page is an invasive nuisance (I hate to think how it would sound to those who use a screen-reader). I suggest, at the very least, (1) getting rid of all inch conversions, as anyone who doesn't know what either a centimetre or a hand is (!?!) can follow the blue link to Hand (unit); (2) abbreviating all units after the first mention; and (3) making sure that "hand" is only linked once instead of a dozen or more times. I also suggest giving precedence to metric units, per MOS:NUM – Britain has used the metric system for longer than I can remember, and that's a pretty long time. I can easily do those things if there's agreement here. Another possibility would be to move the customary units to a footnote. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:07, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

The breed standard is more stringent for stallions because there are supposed to be a lot fewer of them. It's clear that, in spite of clear scientific evidence that gelding a horse actually may allow it to grow taller, not shorter, the standard allowing mares and geldings to be smaller is simply a less stringent standard, reflecting more of them. My view is that it is human anthropomorphism that wants "feminine" mares and "masculine" stallions while at the same time glorifying bigger, stronger horses in general -- breeders can't really have it both ways...

As for the rest, I'd say that where the breed standard by the breed society of the nation of origin (as here) puts it in hands, then hands should lead. That said, I cannot object to giving metric units precedence where that's the only source for height, or where the leading breed society does so as well, at least for some breeds. (It gets complicated for breeds that are widely distributed in the English-speaking world, to the point that they far outnumber representatives in their region of origin, the Arabian being a case in point).

I certainly agree that where a given height conversion is said once, I would agree that we would not need to do it every time that number is mentioned -- but where there is a different number, then conversion would usually have to kick in, though I suppose there does become a point where perhaps if there are a lot of conversions, a chart might be more useful than a narrative. I cannot agree with getting rid of inches altogether; while I can certainly do the inches conversion on the fly, non-horse people cannot. (I can't do metric conversions on the fly, though I can multiply by 2.54...) That hands template is one issue we've gone over quite a bit. If you recall the last round, it was included editors from the UK who vigorously supported the continued use of hands. Frankly, the sexual dimorphism thing annoys me probably as much as the conversion thing bugs you, so if we're both mildly annoyed but can agree to each just live with it, perhaps that is as good as it gets? (smile). Montanabw^(talk) 21:53, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Colour in the Shire before about the 1960s'

I am editing the Gypsy Horse article, and I came across another book on the Shire that had coloured Shires in it. I wonder if this is worth adding--that is, the fact that the Shire used to have colours prior to their culling. Here is what I've written. We could smooth this into the current writeup of course:

Colour was prevalent among Shire horses; Sir Walter Gilbey reproduces and then discusses colour in a drawing of a team of tobiano Shires dating from 1844 to 1855. Commenting on the drawing, he calls the team's tobiano colouring "[t]his curious parti-color" and states that it "is by no means uncommon in the Shires reared in the Fen country." He goes on to describe a stallion who breeds "horses of odd colours" and states that such horses "are common ... [t]o this day", or the late 1800s when his book was first published.[59]

Here is the source: Sir Walter Elbey, Bart, "Concise History of the Shire Horse" (1976). Reprinted from the original 1889) Hampshire: The Spur Publications Company. ISBN 0904558134.

Also, Edward Hart's "The Coloured Horse and Pony" discusses colour in the Shire. I can add this as a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SFGMary (talk • contribs) 17:35, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks!

SFGMary (talk) 19:37, 2 December 2019 (UTC)SFGMary