“The Manifesto of the Arabian Breed” – Part I الإعلان العام للجواد العربي – الجزء الأول

35 Replies to ““The Manifesto of the Arabian Breed” – Part I الإعلان العام للجواد العربي – الجزء الأول”

1. I appreciate the way that you have placed the Bedouin at the centre of this, as the arbiters of what makes an Arab horse an Arab horse. I do have some questions, though. For instance,

   “The higher the degree of embracing the Bedouin values by a Bedouin breeder, the stronger the credibility of his breeding. Context is to be considered in accepting testimonies of Bedouin breeders as one acceptable parameter among others.”

   How are Bedouin values determined? Without some definition or clarification here, this does rather open the door to western breeders holding up, say, Raswan’s strain theory as an example of Bedouin values, however inaccurate that may be.

   Qualities of the breed are also things that need further definition and clarification; and frankly, for physical qualities, maybe some actual numbers – “relatively flat” for the croup, and “dished” for the face show how easy it is for purely verbal descriptions to be re-interpreted and pushed to extremes.

   Just a few thoughts; I do have others, but they’re still rather vague and inarticulate.

   Reply

   1. Thanks Kate for raising this question. I added this point about context to deal with this big transitional period in the Bedouin life near the middle of the 20th century. Many Bedouin tribes within Arabia started to settle and to lose motivation for breeding the scarce and expensive-to-keep Asil horses. Other Bedouin tribes in the surrounding more westernized countries like Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Egypt started to embrace some new imported practices such as the short distance flat races which caused the gradual introduction of thoroughbred blood into some Bedouin breeding programs. This started to happen in Iraq, then later on in Lebanon and Syria, then in Egypt, and eventually in all the Gulf countries (previously part of Arabia). The question of context would not be needed when dealing with the 19th century Bedouin breeders. But it is very much needed in dealing with the 20th century Bedouin breeders to establish their credibility as true-to-their-values breeders. This was applied by Al Khamsa by the way when they examined the circumstance of breeding our remaining desert-bred Tahawi horses ten years ago. It is still needed considering some other desert horses such as those in the Negev desert south Palestine. In my next post about the Definition I try to elaborate more on this.

      For the qualities, the principle only highlights the fact of diversity in the Arabian Horse quality characteristics (physical and mental), and the variety of its morphological types as found in its natural habitat. Defining the boundaries of these qualities is beyond the scope of this declaration. It is enough to acknowledge that the so called “standard type” is just a very selective view of a highly diverse breed.

      Reply

2. Hi Yasser, your post is so significant, that it really requires study and careful, patient thought. With that said, I understand, respect and somewhat agree with your position re: a breed standard. The Arabian horse, in the most basic understanding possesses unique hallmarks or characteristics, both tangible and intangible, that differentiate the horse from all other breeds. While I agree with you for more freedom to move away from the confines of a standard, and more fully embrace the diversity found within the breed; it’s dangerous to move away from the characteristics that I feel, needs to be possessed by any Arab horse. Without them, we lose our breed distinction. Do you agree? That’s the only concern that I have, as more people interpret the Manifesto, as you have written.

   Reply

   1. Ralph-

      From my understanding of your comment, I think you hit upon the central issue facing the Arabian horse: the feeling among breeders today that Arabian horses should have certain physical and/or behavioral characteristics. This is what I understand you mean when you say “characteristics, both tangible and intangible, that differentiate the horse from all other breeds? Please correct me if I am wrong.

      If so, I think these are personal preferences of different breeders as opposed to something that should be incorporated into a “breed standard.” The “breed standard” as it exists today is nothing more than the formalization of the personal preferences of prominent western breeders starting around 1900.

      Arabians are a different type of breed than other types of horses. We should not fall into the trap of viewing the Arabian breed through the same lens as other breeds of horses.

      Lyman

      Reply

      1. Hi Lyman, good to hear from you, within this wonderful site and Yasser’s most amazing work. Thanks for all you said and I appreciate learning your opinion in this important work. I think we are basically saying the same thing, however using different words to say it. There are key qualities, traits, characteristics, hallmarks (whatever you want to call them) that we expect all Arabian horses to possess. As a whole, these qualities form the identity of the Arabian horse breed and for which the breed is recognized. I don’t think this is any different from other breeds of horses, each breed possessing unique characteristics/qualities by which the specific breed is also recognized. Without these unique traits, how to distinguish an Arab from any other horse, right? I don’t think it is viewing an Arab through the lens of another breed, as much as it is recognizing that the Arab is very different and understanding exactly what the differences are, that make the horse different and so special, in all of equine-dom. Hope you are having a great day.
         Ralph

         Reply

   2. Thanks Ralph. That is why I suggest under principle 8 that variability in the breed type is to be accepted within the normal limits found in its natural habitat. The desert already set the limits and boundaries for this, and we have plenty of photographed documentation of the breed that go back to more than a complete century ago. So there is no big risk to deviate from the distinctive qualities. Actually the bigger risks we have today are: first this imposed very selective “standard”, and second pushing this standard so far to the extent of creating genetic mutations and a physical appearance that was never found in the desert a century ago.

      Reply

3. Yasser, I really appreciate your thoughtful outline. This is also timely, since several of the points you raise tie in nicely with a project I am currently working on.

   I think an important topic to bring into the discussion is the difference between a landrace and a breed. My perspective is…prior to being exported from the cradle countries, the Arabian horse was more accurately a landrace. The breeding practices in the countries where the horses were exported began the conversion to a ‘breed’. For me, this reframing is helpful in sorting through the scientific publications on Arabian breed genetic diversity. Especially, as some Arabian horse populations in the Middle East still have the expanded genetic and phenotypic diversity typical of a landrace.

   Bedouin culture, significantly shaped by physical environment, is the cornerstone of the development of the Arabian horse. I think the principles you outline do an excellent job of maintaining that focus.

   Thank you!

   Reply

   1. Thanks Beth and I will be happy to learn more about your project.

      In fact what I believe is that it is indeed a breed rather than a landrace. The Arabs built a strong cultural system for maintaining a breed. Not every horse bred and used inside Arabia was considered Arabian (Asil). Actually the Arabs always knew different types of horses in their daily use. Only those horses that qualified under a very strict system as descending from the ancient (Atiq) horses of the Arabs (the horses of the prophet and his companions) were considered Asil. This is represented in the notions of Rasan (Strain) and Marbat (Stud). Only Asil horses carry a Rasan-Marbat ID, and are part of the “Arabian Breed”. Having this said, the Bedouins did not insist on a narrowly defined phenotype of their breed. They tolerated quite rich phenotypes with some normal variability that yet still allows for distinctive qualities and a general theme.

      Reply

4. I agree that this is something to be thought carefully over. I haven’t fully parsed this or distilled my thoughts yet as I am taking my time to mull it all over, but my initial impression is this: it is absolutely critical, as you have outlined here, to build a framework based on the Bedouin conceptualization of what makes an Arabian, an Arabian. “The Arabian Horse is the product of the Arabic Bedouin Culture” is, to me, the base core of it. Removing Arabian horses from their Bedouin contexts removes from these horses their very quality of being an Arabian.

   Reply

   1. Thanks Moira. Yes we need to keep the discussions going, and all inputs are appreciated. My vision is based on both the Bedouin norms and Science. I feel we are not only responsible for saving the breed today, but also for setting the basis for another millennium to come of the life of the breed.

      Reply

   2. “The Arabian Horse is the product of the Arabic Bedouin Culture” is truth. My husband and I used to say that we wanted our horses to have maintained the physical and mental qualities that their ancestors had when they left the desert in 1906 (in the Davenport importation). That said, I wonder how different the horses might have been had they come from the same tribes 100 years earlier. I hope not much different!

      Reply

5. Yasser: my comments piecemeal, as I read and take some time to think about this endeavor.

   In values, number 4: I would not ascribe a defined territory as the homeland of the Arabian horse, (the “deserts of the Arabian Peninsula”).

   Since the horse is the product of Bedouin society (value 5), and since Bedouins were nomads (ie, they moved around), then the horse went where the Bedouins went (when they were nomads), and settled where they settled (when they became settled).

   Upper Mesopotamia, where most of the last Syrian desert stock is (because that’s where the Tai and Shammar settled); the Golan heights (where the Wuld Ali settled); the plains of southern Turkey (where the Jayss settled); the semi-desertic plains of central Syria (where the Mawali, Hadideen, etc) settled; the island of Bahrain; the Sinai desert and the Salhia desert in Egypt; the plains of al-Ahwaz and Khuzistan in Iran (another strong concentration of horses there), the Biqaa valley in Lebanon, the Naqab desert, the mountains of Assir are not part of the “deserts of the Arabian peninsula” and still homelands of the Arabian horse.

   It’s easier if you say something like: “its range (an important concept) was the range of Bedouin migrations when they were nomads, and its current homeland is where the Bedouins settled. This area comprises etc, etc. etc.

   Reply

   1. Thanks Edouard. In part II I addressed some of your concerns. I added a definition of the homeland and mentioned exactly the same regions you mentioned. So please have a look and we can still change this part and the other if not accurate enough.

      Yes the Bedouins migrated in all directions. But what about the Bedouins who migrated to North Africa? or to Persia and further east? Will you accept this as a homeland. In part II I explicitly say the borders are more cultural than territorial. But we still have to assign a core homeland which is this Arabic region Southwest Asia.

      Reply

      1. You wrote: But what about the Bedouins who migrated to North Africa? or to Persia and further east?

         In theory, yes. If you can ascertain that a tribe of descendants of Hilal, Sulaym, Nail, or others in North Africa, or some of the Hassaniyah tribes in Mauretania kept their horses pure for 900 years, then yes, they are part of the homeland. Lady Anne Blunt mentioned several Arab tribes in the Senegal river valley that had a list of strains in the late 1800s. Check the photos of a local horses in Northern Mali from Doutressoles’s book in 1947, they look like Arabians.

         Reply

6. On integrity, you wrote: “We accept the integrity and purity of the breed as it reached us from its trusted Bedouin sources. Any later development or changes to the breed outside this cultural framework is against the breed integrity.”

   Part of the breed’s destruction in its homeland is the work of Bedouins — some of them Bedouin chieftains — and as early as the 1950s, when asil horses were still coming out of Arabia. Example: Sharif Nassir Bin Jamil and Anwar son of Fawwaz al-Shaalan of the Ruwalah, in Jordan; and Sfug al-Ajil al-Jarba of the Shammar leaders and Ahmad al-Taha the Shaykh of the Juhaysh, both in Northern Iraq in the 1960s-1970s. All these used English TB or Anglo stallions extensively.

   How do you deal with that? This represents a collapse of the Bedouin integrity system that you are talking about.

   You can’t solve it by putting a time limit (they way the Heirloom Group naively put it about Egyptian horses: they said anything born before 1914 WW1 is safe; anything after is not. Why not a time limit?

   Because simply speaking: asil horses are still coming out of Northern Syria in 2021, bred by settled Bedouins of the Shammar. And part-bred, half Anglo came out of the Northern Iraq desert as early as 1955.

   Reply

   1. I totally agree and I wrote a similar comment to Kate above. I added several points to cater for this dilemma. First the Integrity principle establishes the breed integrity throughout its long history. What if modern genetics discover some signs of non Arabian ancestors that found their way to the breed many centuries ago? Will this mean the Arabian Horse is no longer Arabian? We accept the Arabian Horse as the product of the Bedouins. If mistakes or violations happened in the far past we are not going to correct this. But what about modern violations just like the ones you mentioned? I totally agree that we cannot set a cutoff date. We cannot say it is before 1900 or 1940 or 1970. Again we cannot set sharp time borders just like that we cannot set sharp geographical borders. Here again the borders are cultural. That is why Principle #9: Context is important. When the Tahawies submitted horses born in late 1990s to Al Khamsa they were examined based on several factors including the cultural context of their breeders. A Bedouin breeder in 1990 can be more eligible than a Bedouin breeder in 1950 depending on the context.

      Reply

      1. Saying “context” is an easy way out. I think we should be more precise, and relating the value of purity (number 3) to the value of adherence to certain cultural norms and behaviors, like attachment to origins, tradition, reputation, pride, etc.

         Reply

7. Some more comments on the other points:

   I full agree with points 6, 7 and with 8. Variability is related to the concept of “type”.

   On point 5, certainty, I agree too, but the arabic equivalent is “ith-baat” rather than “Ta’akkud”. “Mathbut” is a Bedouin-related notion that you often find in hujaj etc, from which came the colloquial variant “Mazbut” used by Lady Anne Blunt and others.

   On point 10, proof is good, but when you don’t have it, you can use reasonable assumptions. Some people make assumptions based on wishful thinking.

   On point 11, what if science contradicts other evidence from the Bedouin context. Let me give you an example: two lineages from the same marbat (e.g., K. Haifi) both have strong original documents, strong links to the Bedouin contexts, but their mtDNA does not match, when it should. What do you do?

   Reply

   1. Now on purity, value number 3. This is a difficult one. Much has been written about it, and not very intelligent stuff in my opinion. It’s the primordial value the West put on the Arab horse breed, relatively late in time (XVIIIth-XIXth century, at a time when the ideologies of racism and aryanism were emerging), and in my opinion, it aligns very imperfectly with the notion of “‘itq” (atiq) and “asl” (asil).

      “Purity of blood” in general is neither an Arab nor a Bedouin notion. A person can be of very high/old/noble Arab lineage with a long pedigree back to an important historical figure (say, the Prophet or his Companions) but be the son or maternal grandson of a Circassian, Ukrainian, Persian or African woman, and still be considered “pure” and “noble”. That said, I feel it’s too late to replace the notion of “purity” with ‘itq, so we will to live with “purity”.

      I think a good input into the discussion is the article of Kees “Is Purity the Issue”. I can’t find it online anymore, but perhaps Kees will agree to a republication.

      In the XIXth century, perhaps due to European influence on the Ottoman empire, you start seeing a more direct Arabic language equivalent to the Western notion of purity, and that’s the notion of “safaa” (safi), so you start seeing in the hujaj the phrase “pure/safi as milk”.

      Reply

      1. I would really like to know more about asl and ‘itq. Those seem important terms to understand, and it’s not necessarily too late to replace “purity” with the original notions.

         Reply

         1. Atiq is a very rich term and much more authentic than Asil. The term Asil is quite modern from the Mamluk era. Atiq is older from the early Islamic era, and the much older term is Eraab (derived from Arab). Atiq is an exaggerated form. It combines three meanings: Ancient, Valuable, and Free! You can have a good understanding of the indication of this term if you know that it was used in Quran to describe the Kaaba, the holiest part on Earth for the Arabs and Muslims. Free in this context means it endured and spared the tests of time. So Atiq is an ancient valuable thing that became more precious with the pass of time.

            Reply

   2. Re your comment on point 11, I would think that in historical contexts, Bedouin evidence trumps science, so the two K. Haifi lineages would be fine, despite different matrilines. Pushing modern understandings of genetics and DNA tests and the like on historical horses to determine their authenticity doesn’t work for me, because, as a historian, I find that anachronistic. It imposes an external view that wasn’t relevant at the time, and was not used to determine the status of an Arabian horse. Instead, I would prefer to use the evidence from the time, i.e. the original documents, because that is in keeping with how said historical horse’s status was determined.

      On the other hand, if science indicates that a contemporary horse does not have the parents it is said to have, then that’s where I’d be more inclined to let science have the upper hand. (Cough the Amer sireline cough.)

      Reply

      1. We are in agreement about this. The scientific approach is not going to judge the breed authenticity in the past, but rather map the past for the use of the future. So we needed the genetic studies to reflect the current genetic identity of the breed, then use it as a reference for the future. You mentioned K. Haifi lineages of different matrilines. That is absolutely fine. I wrote before that there is nothing in history that says a strain must descend from a single historical dam. A strain can have multiple matrilines. We accept the breed as is, here comes the integrity principle (#2). But if two modern lines assumed to descend from the same mare c1900 do not show the same mtDNA then this is a contradiction that has to be addressed.

         Reply

         1. I agree re: how DNA studies should fit into this equation. There is the “data” and then there is also “interpretation of that data”. Genomic studies are informative for showing relationships, but it is still human interpretation that further defines that information. And context from the historical record (even with any flaws) and cultural considerations are key in making those interpretations. DNA is only part of the story.

            I think this also links into why further understanding what “purity” means (and ideally, getting away from that word) is important. A project I’m involved with (briefly mentioned earlier) is working to help explain some of the genetic diversity data. One point in particular – to help dispel the belief of some that purity equals homozygosity, and therefore the complex ancestry shown in horses from homeland regions means they aren’t as “pure”, as say the Straight Egyptians. There needs to be a reframing of the “purity concept” and I think the quicker that happens, the better.

            Reply

            1. I agree so very much with what you are saying! And oh my goodness, people are actually wilfully misinterpreting the evidence that Arab horses in their cradle countries are wonderfully diverse as a lack of “purity”? Good grief.

               Reply

               1. I can’t help but wonder how much of the concept of “purity” in Arabians, ie a closed gene pool for thousands of years, is built upon the fanciful Orientalism of Westerners.

                  Reply

                  1. Moira, here is how Principle 3 – Authenticity is proposed in the new draft:

                     “The term Atiq carries overlapping meanings. It is Ancient, Precious, and Free [of flaws] all at the same time. It indicates both authenticity and purity. Purity is a cultural rather than a genetic notion. It represents an ideal which the Arab Bedouins always strived to maintain. Authenticity, in this context, is the quality of going back to ancient, preserved, protected Bedouin sources that are assumed pure. The Atiq concept as the primary determinant of breed integrity is taken as valid throughout history, and it is our duty to maintain.”

                     A lot of editing was done after publishing this post.

                     Reply

      2. Good point. Although I was thrilled to find out that 8 out of 11 different Kuhaylan Nawwaq lines I had had analyzed shared the same MtDNA haplotype A25

         Reply

   3. Yes “Thubut” is a better word than “Ta’akkud”. I did that in part II and should do it here as well.

      For point 10, I elaborated on this in Part II by adding two definition notes called “Objective Evaluation” and “Objective Evidence”. You might like this part. I utilize my experience as an assessor in the software quality domain here 🙂 … Reasonable assumptions are based on these two notes and cannot be based on wishful thinking.

      For point 11, maybe we need to make this more clear. We accept the integrity of the breed in the past, we use science to map this integrity (as is) and then become a tool for judging the present and future. If mistakes did happen in the far past that is inside the authentic “kitchen” of the Bedouin and is not to be judged or corrected.

      Reply

      1. I will now move to Part II. This was fruitful.

         Reply

8. Thank you everyone for the comments in this discussion. I am finding this one of the most useful conversations I have ever seen on this topic. Like others, I am carefully going over and deeply thinking about each point. There are 3 areas that I am initially sorting through, that I would like to ask some questions about.

   1. Rasan and marbat: This might be oversimplistic, but if a horse has a rasan and marbat – doesn’t that, by default, identify them as Asil? Is there anything that would result in a horse with a rasan-marbat name not being considered Asil? How does the point on ‘integrity’ fit into a rasan-marbat name being accepted as accurate? I also have some questions regarding shubuw – but will wait to get through this first set of questions, before adding more on this one.

   2. Characteristics: Since the primary selection criteria for the Arabian horse breed’s foundation stock was the ability to survive under the harsh living conditions in the homeland area, and not for what the West has become accustomed to regarding having a ‘specific breed standard’, what are some examples of physical characteristics that would not be considered acceptable; even if the horse has a rasan-marbat name? If a horse was found to not be acceptable, due to those physical traits, how would that impact the acceptance of their immediate ancestors (sire/dam, siblings, grandparents, etc.)?

   3. Purity: I think distinguishing the difference between the West’s idea of purity and the notion of Atiq and Asil is vital. I am very interested in learning more about the example Edouard gave regarding someone who can be of very noble lineage _and_ be the son or grandson of a Circassian, etc. woman _and_ still be considered ‘pure’ and ‘noble.’

   Thank you again everyone for this wonderful discussion!

   Reply

   1. Thanks Beth. I am very happy for the way this discussion is growing. Hopefully this will lead to something very solid at the end.

      1. Rasan-Marabat were indeed the identity assigned by the Bedouins to Asil Horses. But for this identity to be carried forward from one generation to the next it must follow the strict rules of Shubuw where the sire is also known as Asil. This can happen within the same Marbat or by other breeders who acquired a mare from that Marbat. In the latter case detailed testimonies and attestations have to be provided on the identity of the sire. Since the mid of the 20th century this process had many violations as Edouard mentioned, and strong investigation were needed to make sure that carrying forward the Rasan-Marbat to the offspring is legitimate. In the recent times some strain-marbat combinations became synonym with impure lines.

      2. Characteristics. This is a very tricky and risky area. Unpleasant characteristics are not to be mixed with the definite signs of Hujna. You cannot exclude an Asil horse because it looks ugly, or weak, or with poor conformation. But you can exclude it if it has buckskin color for example. We have to accept variability in the breed morphology. Even these modern horses with extreme dishes and flat croups, which I personally consider not very Arabian, cannot be excluded if they qualify as Asil. We can only encourage breeders to breed more correct horses. Definite morphological signs of Hujna need to be carefully defined.

      3. Purity. This was subject to lengthy discussion between me and Edouard today. We agreed to be careful about the use of this term and to clearly state that the notion of purity is more cultural than genetic. The example about noble Arab with Circassian mother is more applicable to humans than to horses in my view. A new statement of the purity principle is being written under the title Authenticity.

      Reply

      1. Thank you very much, Yasser. This information is quite helpful. I am looking forward to reading the revised ‘purity principle’.

         Reply

      2. A thought I have been having re: colors, brought up by the mention of buckskin being unacceptable–

         We know that W20 (White Spotting Booster) is OLD and predates all modern breeds, and there is strong evidence that there are numerous KIT, MITF, and PAX3 mutations that have yet to be identified. Obviously, white spotting and white markings are found in asil horses. Some are old, and some are probably de novo mutations. Even if white is potentially frowned upon, it’s still _there_, and inevitably new mutations will eventually appear.

         Would this possibly also extend to other “funky” colors (in the vein of thought with the cream gene, the champagne gene, etc., and other mutations that affect phenotype) — if de novo mutations occur, or if mutations are found to have been in asil bloodlines for a very long time? I know that traditionally cream has been excluded as a sign of impurity, but I am curious about that because, at least in the Saudi BLUE Stars, there are at least three horses that have shown signs of some kind of mutation in their asil genepool that affects how the pigment appears. The horses I am specifically thinking about are AAS Zenad, Mireyenion TOS, and Ali-Zeus, all whose phenotypes showed some pretty clear signs of what is apparently some form of recessive dilution gene.

         Reply

9. Another point:

   There is no such thing as an “impure” Arabian horse, or partly pure. Statements chat forums about “my horse is 7/8 asil” do not make sense from an Bedouin-inspired understanding of the Arabian horse. If a horse is not asil, then it is not an Arabian, period. There is no such thing as an Arabian horse that is a “little bit asil” or a “little bit non-asil”. It is like being a little bit pregnant.

   Reply