The Przewalski's horse is one of two types (according to another interpretation, one of three subspecies) of modern horses. As the only species of primordially wild horses, Przewalski's horse has attracted special attention from various researchers. One of the most controversial was the question of its taxonomic affiliation. With an enviable frequency, at least once every 5-10 years, Przewalski's horse was either declared a separate species or a subspecies of the Equus ferus species.
But this year a new field for controversy has emerged: in March, Science published an article “Ancient genomes revisit the ancestry of domestic and Przewalski's horses,” the authors of which revised the existing hypothesis about the origin of domestic horses. The number of authors is impressive: 47 researchers from all over the world. The group was headed by the French paleogeneticist Louis Orlando. The study covered the genomes of modern horses, fossil horses from several Eneolithic sites, as well as materials on the Przewalski horse, which lived about 150 years ago (modern Przewalski horses were crossed with domestic horses, their genome is not correct to use).
As a result of the study, two phylogenetic branches were established: the first included tarpans, almost all horses found in primitive sites and modern domestic horses, the second - Przewalski's horse, and horses found in the territory of the Botay culture. The conclusion was the following: Przewalski's horse is a feral horse that was previously domesticated by people of the Botay culture. However, modern domestic horses are descended from tarpan, domesticated in another center, independently of Botay.
The conclusions of the article caused a wide resonance among paleontologists and archaeologists. The magazine "Nature" has prepared "our answer to Chingachguk." In the 7th issue of 2018, 4 articles were published at once, in which paleogenetics, morphologists, zoologists, archaeologists prove that the conclusion of colleagues, to put it mildly, is hasty, and that there is no reason to consider Przewalski's horse run wild, that this species has not been changed by man. The horses were defended by: Candidates of Biological Sciences A. N. Tikhonov, N. I. Abramson, P. A. Kosintsev, N. A. Plasteeva, N. N. Spasskaya and candidate of historical sciences P. F. Kuznetsov. The problem was considered from different angles, but the main conclusions are as follows. No one doubts the absolute correctness of the research carried out by the international team. But conclusions were made hastily.
Promotional video:
The kinship of the horses found at the sites of people of the Botay culture and the Przewalski's horse does not allow us to judge the "domestic" origin of the latter. First of all, it is highly doubtful that the Botay people would tame horses. Indeed, many horse bones have been found. But it has long been proven that people of the Stone Age, and the Bronze Age too, actively hunted equids. And the cultural level of the "Botay" in comparison with the cultures of the adjacent territories of Yamnaya and Afanasyevskaya was significantly lower. It is worth mentioning at least that people of Botay culture never used metal!
Some doubts pointing to the domestication of horses were also based on the discovery of two objects, in the form of bone rods with thickenings in the middle, resembling elements of a horse bridle - cheekpieces. But the lack of drilled holes required to pass the belt tensioners raise doubts about the correctness of the interpretation of these tools. The next discrepancy is the appearance of Przewalski's horse. Zebra stripes on the lower part of the legs, a standing mane, a monochromatic color of most of the body - all these are very primitive signs that could hardly have formed again in feral horses. And the character of the Przewalski's horse, frankly, is not angelic - most modern attempts to domesticate these animals have not been crowned with success. It is unlikely that the ancestors of these horses were more flexible.
Finally, geography is also opposed to the version of the authors of the March article. Between the north of Kazakhstan, where people of the Botay culture once lived, and Dzungaria, where Przhevalsky's horses lived until recently, there are thousands of kilometers, on which tarpans lived. Considering the fact that the two types of horses cross perfectly and give fertile offspring, the conclusion suggests itself - Botay horses would have dissolved in the mass of tarpans, long before they got to Dzungaria. If we assume that the people themselves took their domestic horses there, then there must be traces of the Botay culture in a much larger territory than we actually observe.
Thus, the following conclusion suggests itself - the people of Botay culture were really well acquainted with the quite wild horses of Przewalski. Only the interaction between them was much more prosaic: the predator-prey, and not the owner-animal.
Yaroslav Popov
