One more picture of an Arabian under the snow
By Edouard Aldahdah
Posted on January 17th, 2010 in Bahrain
This one is Thank Heaven, a 2003 grey mare (by Mlolshaan Hager Solomon x Llanys Winddancer by Ru Serr Llany), owned by Cathie Fye in the USA. As far as I know she is the only progeny of the Bahraini asil (heck, super-asil) stallion Mloolshaan Hager Solomon who has been in this country for 22 years now…
January 20th, 2010 9:51 am
I like that stallion also.It’s a little bit far away, I think he was a good match for my mare too. (dahmah/hadriya). it’s sad that he has only one progeny.
January 20th, 2010 7:56 pm
I would think the Blue Star breeders in the US would flock to this horse. Any idea why they have not?
January 20th, 2010 10:57 pm
He has the Ma’naghi strain in his pedigree…
January 24th, 2010 10:55 am
Maye we could find someone with known Ma’naghi close up in their horses pedigrees who could volunteer to have their horses tested by Gus Cothrans at the University of Kentucky. If the science has advanced far enough they could be checked to see if they had Thorobred genetic markers thus determining whether the whole Ma’naghis were contaminated by Turkomans theory holds water.
best wishes
Bruce Peek
January 24th, 2010 1:35 pm
For my own education, would someone please direct me to the sources in which Raswan tells of learning about a possible inclusion of Turkoman blood in the Ma’anaghi strain?
Thanks!
January 24th, 2010 1:50 pm
It won’t work with the existing state of science on mtDNA, because the Raswan Ma’naghi theory is about originally asil Ma’naghi mares being crossed with Turkoman stallions by members of the Salqa tribe nomadizing in Northern Iraq. mtDNA markers are transmitted through the dam only.
January 27th, 2010 12:41 pm
Considering the amount of Arabian topcrossing that was used to create the English Thoroughbred, any similarity at the DNA level between the two breeds is already explained, and cannot support an investigation of alleged historic “contamination” of the Arabian line.
January 27th, 2010 1:28 pm
Good additional point, Ambar!
January 28th, 2010 12:23 am
Yes Ambar, good point. I’ll make one more point: assuming you could identify a marker that seemed to be unique to Thoroughbreds and Thoroughbred crosses, you would have no way of knowing whether it was originally an Arabian marker that went extinct in the Middle East but was preserved in the Thoroughbred breed.
January 28th, 2010 9:25 am
Good points all. And it further indicates why the science of DNA is limited to what it can and can’t do. I have always felt that because this breed is called “Arabian” horse that ultimately it is the culture that defines the breed, not the science.
January 28th, 2010 12:34 pm
Re: “because this breed is called “Arabian” horse that ultimately it is the culture that defines the breed, not the science”
Joe, this is the best quote I have heard in a long time. I have also always felt that the Bedouins, as the original custodians of the breed, are those who get to define what an Arabian horse is.
January 28th, 2010 5:17 pm
Boy, do I agree! Charles always said that what we were after with the Davenports was what the Bedouin had in 1900, whatever that was. Can we steal that quote, Joe, for Al Khamsa?!
January 28th, 2010 6:32 pm
This is something that I have been saying for quite a while now. You are welcome to say this however you want, Jeanne.