Talk:On Horsemanship

Untitled
I've read this book, and will attempt to do better justice to it than this. Xenophon was a little early in history to deal with Lipizzaners, don't you think? At least 1400 years or so too early :) --Domhail 08:35, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Should not this be moved to Wikiquote? --Ghirla | talk 10:22, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

According to the article Xenophon the author died in 355 BC so the book could hardly be written in 350 BC. --Proofreader 10:55, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Page is well done, none the less. Great 'Cliff Notes' version. LT.

I've been making a few corrections to the English, without (I hope) altering the sense. My usual practice would be to try and make the writing more gender-neutral -- here the horse and the rider are both 'he' throughout -- but in this case I have left that alone, because I guess it's very likely that Xenophon wrote it that way originally. S M Woodall (talk) 10:13, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * No problem, though it's sort of a line-by-line analysis. Where Xenophon's descriptions are used, "he" for people probably has to be kept. However, in horse articles, I tend to move to gender-neutral terms like "the" for horses unless it's clear that only a gelding or stallion is used.  Mares ARE ridden too -- and in some cultures (like the Bedouin) almost exclusively so.  Montanabw (talk) 23:18, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Praise
Forty five minutes into this episode of Australian national radio's Bush Telegraph the presenter, historian Michael Cathcart says, "Dear listener, if you're interested in persuing Xenophon, there is actually a fantastic Wikipedia site that basically sumarises On Horsemanship, and it's well worth reading. I was reading it last night; it's incredibly illuminating." --Anthonyhcole (talk) 04:42, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Unsourced content
This page contains a mass of content apparently derived from the book itself, with no hint of a reference. Without sources it appears to be nothing but original research. Unless it is cited to independent reliable sources in the fairly near future, I plan to remove it, perhaps replacing it with a skeleton outline of the content of the book. Any objections? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:45, 18 September 2018 (UTC)