# Why not call it a Zebra?



## Guru Coyote (Aug 7, 2013)

This is a bit of a reverse to the "A Troll is a Troll" topic, from which it developed.
The real title for this thread might be "What to call things."

So, in my story world people have riding animals. They act and function just like horses do in our world (and many other worlds). But they are actually domesticated zebras, so they look like striped horses or actual Zebras, just with the size and strength of horses.

When I decided to call these animals 'horses,' the obviious question I got was "Why not call them Zebras, if that's what they are?"

Well, that reall is the question, isn't it? Are they Zebras? 
My argument was that the name of something is usually more like a moniker for a certain characteristic, for its useage etc. In that sense, they are horses, not zebras. You can not tame a zebra, let alone ride it. These are domesticated zebras. Calling them zebra - even if they actually are - would be like calling a husky a wolf.

So, "call them what they are" is a double edged advice. Because what they are really depends on who you ask.

I'd like to hear your thoughts on this 

P.S. my bestiary contains some other - small - oddities, which I mainly have for flavor: Spiders are called Weavers and there is a mythical creature called a hedgehog which there are only descriptions of. Oh and then there is the Quatlmander, a mythical creator which the MC will soon find is not at all mythical.


----------



## CupofJoe (Aug 7, 2013)

For me, this is somewhat of analogous to the apatosaurus -brontosaurus -sauropod that was going on in palaeontology a decade or so ago. 
To the general public; does the "accurate" name mean more or less than an "inaccurate" but widely understood name?
I tend to the deductive - if it looks like a horse [sort of], acts like a horse and is used like a horse - then its a horse.
But that said - if all the differences are in the coat, then why not make it a "banded" horse [from the Isle of XXYYZZ...].
Zebras have been notoriously hard to domesticate, it has been done but not often or reliably and [I think] are at best pony sized...


----------



## Chilari (Aug 7, 2013)

What about calling it a Zebrorse? Establish that it is a domesticated creature and that the non-domesticated equivalent is slightly different with a different name, problem solved.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Aug 7, 2013)

I get what you're saying... they function as horses so call them horses right? Here's the thing...by doing so, you're allowing the reader to question your setting. If you describe these animals as white and black striped horses, anyone born on this planet will think "Zebra". You could potentially be including a minor detail that readers may find jarring.

For my tastes, I'd rather not waste time on details that aren't plot or character relevant. What I mean by that is, if calling it a zebra cuts to the chase, and has no significant impact on story, then do so. 

However, if there is a relevant point...a detail about why zebras are called horses in this setting, that impacts story, then by all means proceed. As a reader, I want my early questions to be paid off.


----------



## Graylorne (Aug 7, 2013)

I'd say the idea of untamable zebra's is a fallacy. If a people would spend several thousand years of domesticating them, you'd get a ridable zebra that's not spooked easily, is of the right size, etc. That's what selective breeding is for, after all.

So I suggest you use the common terms, like riding zebra, cart-zebra, war zebra, etc. You could make them slightly more individualistic, or whatever characteristics a zebra has.

But I'd call them zebra, because that's what they are.

If you want the hybrid variant, see: 'zebroid'


----------



## Guru Coyote (Aug 7, 2013)

Thanks for the feedback so far!

I guess the real solution would be to call it neither horse nor zebra, because both term are misleading.

The point about this reader-question needing to be addressed in a significant way is very good, thatnk you for that, T.Allen.Smith.

So the question I need to ask myself as a writer here is this: why do I want striped horses descendant from zebras? If I can put a good answer to that, I can weave it into the setting and make it relevant to the plot.
One way this might be significant - but a way I am not fully sure I will be following - is that the setting *could* very well be a future Earth, although the societies are more or less medieval. The world being a possible future earth is something I keep playing with, but which I think would be a mystery never actually answered in the story.

the thing with Zebrose or similar names is this: we have zebra-horse hybrids in our world which go by several names that are a combination of zebra and horse (or pony or donkey). And that is one thin my horses are not: they are not horse zebra hybrids, they are fully fertile and have been bred for generations.


----------



## Scribble (Aug 7, 2013)

Guru Coyote said:


> Thanks for the feedback so far!
> 
> I guess the real solution would be to call it neither horse nor zebra, because both term are misleading.
> 
> ...



I would call them zebras. One line of exposition could clear all that up for the reader, or better, embedded in description or dialogue.  

You could simply mention wild zebras that are un-ridable as opposed to the domesticated zebras.

Question: Zebras are known for their stripes causing visual confusion to predators, the patterns making it more difficult to pick out an individual. Do the riders adopt stripes to take advantage of that?


----------



## Svrtnsse (Aug 7, 2013)

I wrote a reply to this at work a few hours ago, but it seems I forgot to press sent. T.A.S said pretty much what I wanted to say though. I guess I could sum it up with "don't call them what they are, call them what they look like".

When you're using a word the reader will associate it with something and they will do that immediately when they see the word. When you read the word horse you will envision a horse in your mind and you expect the horse to look like a horse. 
The following sentence is simple and easy: "A horse stood in the field." It's not particularly exciting but when you read it you have a vision of a horse standing in a field in your mind. There aren't any particular details in the sentence but you fill them in yourself based on your perception of what a horse looks like and what a field looks like.
Now move on to the following sentence: "A horse with black and white stripes stood in the field." Try to ignore that it's a pretty dull/bad sentence and just try to imagine a horse with black and white stripes in a field. Your mind stumbles a little and turns the horse into a zebra and then back into a horse as that's what it says i the sentence. It still feels a bit weird though as you've never seen a horse with black and white stripes before.
Next example sentence: "A zebra stood in the field." It's pretty boring, but there are no associative bumps in the sentence. You accept it as it is written without questioning the existence of the zebra.
Finally: "A big riding-zebra stood in the field." This is more interesting I think. Sure, there aren't any big riding-zebras in the real world, but it's less of an associative bump then a horse with black and white stripes. We don't change the shape or coloration of the animal here, we just scale it up a little and that's a lot easier for the mind to accept.

The above is all based on my personal opinions and theories. It's not backed up by any kind of science or research so take it with as many pinches of salt as you feel like. 
Also, if someone has a better expression for "associative bumps", please share. I couldn't think of anything else at the moment and the term's a bit unwieldy.


----------



## Svrtnsse (Aug 7, 2013)

Scribble said:


> Question: Zebras are known for their stripes causing visual confusion to predators, the patterns making it more difficult to pick out an individual. Do the riders adopt stripes to take advantage of that?



I would assume they don't. 
The stripe "camouflage" works best against predators attacking a large group of zebras. I'm thinking that the enemies of a rider on domesticated zebra are likely to be intelligent enough not to fall for that.


----------



## Nihal (Aug 7, 2013)

Actually their pattern effectiveness isn't related to the predator's intelligence, but to his visual perception. The stripes of zebras will make the animals blend into each other when the herd is charging, hence making it harder to pick an individual. Being more intelligent won't change the way your eyes work.

I believe, however, that having a rider would nullify this advantage. His shape would stand out above each animal making the task of tracking individuals easier.


----------



## Scribble (Aug 7, 2013)

Nihal said:


> Actually their pattern effectiveness isn't related to the predator's intelligence, but to his visual perception. The stripes of zebras will make the animals blend into each other when the herd is charging, hence making it harder to pick an individual. Being more intelligent won't change the way your eyes work.
> 
> I believe, however, that having a rider would nullify this advantage. His shape would stand out above each animal making the task of tracking individuals easier.



I just thought it could be an interesting tactic of the riders, in keeping with the "spirit" of riding zebras. It could be something they are known for, the dazzling display of the riders, the lines of white and black dancing in such a way to almost hypnotize the enemy, confuse their sight.


----------



## Asterisk (Aug 7, 2013)

I'm going to ramble a bit here.... so they're zebras with the strength of horses, or horses that look like zebras. From the perspective of myself as a reader, I would think that the name zebra just isn't really.... serious. But depending on the climate of your world, it may be. If your people live in savannahs or drier areas, it would make sense. But riding zebras to war in the typical setting would make me laugh. Describing these creatures as striped horses..... for me, I wouldn't think of zebras. Just a war strategy or something. If I were in your shoes, I would make up a name. The idea is really creative and I love it. I wish you best of luck!


----------



## Motley (Aug 7, 2013)

A whole bunch of stuff in fantasy stories don't act how they do in the real world. Woodland creatures talk, horses turn rainbow colors, farm boys actually know how to use a sword and go off to save the world.

I think if it's biologically very similar to a zebra, call it a zebra. A zebra in a fantasy story can be ridden, go to war or yodel show tunes if you want.


----------



## Ireth (Aug 7, 2013)

I don't really see a problem with calling some animals by something other than their real name. Tamora Pierce did this a bit in her Tortall books, with "duckmoles" (platypuses). I have vampires in one of my novels, but I don't call them vampires; they're _sumairach fala_ (singular: _sumair fala_), or blood-drinkers. There's a real-life reason for this: it takes place in our world, in the mid-1400's, centuries before the term "vampire" was coined. I had to come up with an alternative name that wasn't already being used by different blood-drinking creatures, like the Celtic Baobhan Sidhe.


----------



## Jabrosky (Aug 7, 2013)

Why is the OP using zebras instead of old-school horses in the first place? Is his setting African-based? Personally I prefer "zebra".

As a world-builder my own rabbit/smeerp issues come when I have to address animals publicly known by their Greco-Latin genus names, such as most prehistoric lifeforms. If your setting's human culture is based on pre-colonial West Africa, dinosaur names like Guanlong or Lambeosaurus are going to sound out of place (the former name is Chinese while the latter was named after a white Canadian guy).


----------



## Scribble (Aug 8, 2013)

> A horse is a horse, of course, of course,
> And no one can talk to a horse, of course,
> Unless, of course, the horse, of course,
> Is the famous Mr. Ed!



I just had to add this 

Carry on...


----------



## SineNomine (Aug 8, 2013)

CupofJoe said:


> Zebras have been notoriously hard to domesticate, it has been done but not often or reliably and [I think] are at best pony sized...



This is slightly off topic, but IIRC this isn't the case.  Zebras have certainly been repeatedly tamed by multiple people at multiple times, but have never been domesticated.



Graylorne said:


> I'd say the idea of untamable zebra's is a fallacy. If a people would spend several thousand years of domesticating them, you'd get a ridable zebra that's not spooked easily, is of the right size, etc. That's what selective breeding is for, after all.



Well...there are some issues with that though.  The problem with this is in assuming it hasn't been tried.  Humans started domesticating large animals around 10,000 years ago and there is no reason to think they didn't try with as many creatures as they could.  Certainly zebras had potential since the desert prevented horses from traveling to sub-saharan africa for a long, long time.  When horses did reach the Bantu in West Africa, it was immediately adopted and put to work, so it wasn't for lack of wanting them, they could instantly appreciate their use.  The reason horses didn't spread further was their vulnerability to certain diseases.  Zebras aren't vulnerable to those diseases so there was almost undoubtedly attempts to domesticate them.

Ultimately, taming may simply be easier and end up making people give up on domestication anyway.  Consider Elephants, all the great history of them being used in war and the fact that they are still used as beasts of burden in parts of the world.  For all their great use, they have never been domesticated.  To this day, they are still tamed.

Of course, this is only really tangential to the issue at hand since we are writing fantasy and you can do what you want.  Bringing this back to the question the TC poses...I don't know.  I think calling them horses and gradually letting your descriptions of them make your reader realize they are actually zebras is probably best.  Horses and Zebras are related to the same distance that Bactrian and Dromedary camels are.  We call both of those camels and no one flinches.  Solid and Striped Horses fit perfectly in that same niche in my mind.  Hell, if they were ever domesticated they might be called that now anyway.  Or "Savannah Horse".

Actually, screw it, there is a species of Zebra known as the Imperial Zebra.  Call 'em Imperial Horses and have the reader find out that the imperial in this case means zebra.


----------



## rhd (Aug 8, 2013)

Have you tried creating a myth around your zebra-horse? It could become an opportunity to write a folk tale about it as a part of your world-building, sort of like Rudyard Kiplings Just-So stories, How the Tiger Got its Stripes, or the Zulu story of how the cheetah got the tear marks on her face. It might even help you build the romance around the animal, and depending on how relevant the animal is to your story, make it more exciting than the every day zebra for the reader. It could occupy a paragraph of your story at the most.


----------



## wordwalker (Aug 8, 2013)

The tricky thing about this is that both known words have baggage. A horse *is* a horse (sorry, Scribble), and it's a lot of work to use the word but make readers see stripes, let alone the rest of the zebra's shape. A zebra... to readers who don't know horses or don't mind fudging facts, the word is fine, but to others it looks like failure of research.

Still, I think first impressions matter more. I'd recommend using the z-word instead of the h, and use things like legends and clear world-building to make it clear that you do know real-world zebras' limits, and these beasts are better. You might also make them a breed of "true zebras" or some other variation on the common animal (the _Firekeeper_ books have "royal wolves" and what they call "cousins") to remind us that the proper term isn't simply "zebra"-- but most of the time that's what people say.


----------



## Guru Coyote (Aug 11, 2013)

Ok, first, sorry for not responding to all this great input and thoughts, I was offline due to ISP issues... and then away for a weekend for RPG reasons.

I love some of the ideas put forth, and in my own (part discovery-)writing, I seem to prefer referring to them as 'steeds' and 'mounts' and describing them with stripes.
And yes, there is a myth/legend around these animals, in so far as the ones in question are the last remains of 'The Silvertree.' The Silvertree bloodline (of steeds) has more or less been whiped out by fate, but the MC's mother is the last Silvertree breeder, now trying to re-build a viable stock from animals she can find in the various stables of the region.

One thing I am not yet fully sure of: are all 'horses' descendant fro zebra stock, and the Silvertree is the most pure... or are most other horses jus that, while Silvertree is actually once-zebra. We will see as the story/worldbuilding progresses.
One thing I do want is for the biology of all this to be 'possible' as my fantasy tends towards the alternate more than the fantastical. As I may have noted before, there are several hints that the region the story plays in *could* be a future Earth.

I see one slight issue: Zebra (and their metal image/pattern) says Africa. The region and geography of my world hints towards Mesoamerica, with The North being more or less desert, and things becoming more and more fertile the farther you go South... with people of my main region using the term 'Jungle' when they want to talk down on people from the South.

That being said, all of my 'world' has misplaced 'imagery'. My fold of the South are basically Cuacasian, while the desert nobles of the North have dark skin... I may yet call it 'red' but am not fully sure about that.
(The alternate/future worldbuilding explanation for all this is this: we have had some migrations, catastrophes etc. to mix up the cultures, ethnicities and also the fauna.)


----------



## Steerpike (Aug 11, 2013)

Jabrosky said:


> As a world-builder my own rabbit/smeerp issues come when I have to address animals publicly known by their Greco-Latin genus names, such as most prehistoric lifeforms. If your setting's human culture is based on pre-colonial West Africa, dinosaur names like Guanlong or Lambeosaurus are going to sound out of place (the former name is Chinese while the latter was named after a white Canadian guy).



I wouldn't worry too much about the rabbit/smeerp issue in those cases. Those aren't commonly known or recognized names to begin with, so if you call them something else that you made up I think the readers will be just fine with it.


----------



## Devor (Aug 11, 2013)

wordwalker said:


> Still, I think first impressions matter more. I'd recommend using the z-word instead of the h, and use things like legends and clear world-building to make it clear that you do know real-world zebras' limits, and these beasts are better. You might also make them a breed of "true zebras" or some other variation on the common animal (the _Firekeeper_ books have "royal wolves" and what they call "cousins") to remind us that the proper term isn't simply "zebra"-- but most of the time that's what people say.



I'm definitely one of those people who would see "Zebra" and think, "this person doesn't know what he's talking about" - and it would bug me unless I saw something to show me he knows that a Zebra's back isn't really right for riding like a horse. But zebra gives readers the visual, so I would want to see something like "flat-backed zebra" to straighten it out.

Legends are nice, multiple varieties are nice, but sometimes those things can just give it more time and attention than it's worth.  I can't answer as to whether it's worth it or not in this case.


----------



## Guru Coyote (Aug 12, 2013)

To illustrate some of what I was talking about, I've posted a chapter of my WiP in the showcase:
http://mythicscribes.com/forums/showcase/9481-blitz-donner-{~1-6k-words}.html#post129969

This already has some of the suggestions from this thread applied. I'd love to hear what you all think.


----------



## Scribble (Aug 12, 2013)

You've got to have some faith in readers. You've got a pretty dense reader if they can't figure out from zebras being ridden, trained, and bred in the story that this is possible.

A little dialogue could clear it up.



> Apart from the herd was a separate corral. One lone zebra colt trotted along the fence, trying to follow the herd's movements.
> "Why is that one separate?" said Kita.
> "He's a wilder. Makes trouble," replied Zuranas.
> "How so?"
> ...


----------



## Daichungak (Aug 12, 2013)

The best suggestion I have heard so far is describing them as “banded horses” or something similar.  IMO As a reader this conveys the domestication of a horse with the looks of a zebra in the easiest way.  All you really need to do is tell the reader what it does and how it looks doing it, they will create the rest if it matters to them.


----------



## psychotick (Aug 12, 2013)

Hi,

As I recall in WWII the Germans tried to use zebras as riding / freight animals across the African battlefields. The main problem they had wasn't that the animals were too difficult to domesticate it was that they were small compared to horses and didn't have the greatest stamina.

However more on topic, I'd stay away from using the term zebra as its a very loaded word coming with connotations of Africa. Unless your work is set there it's just going to distract readers as they constantly wonder why a zebra is wandering through the pages of your book. I'd tend to go with something like striped horses.

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Aug 12, 2013)

I wrote a post about zebras a while ago, wherein I mentioned that zebras are difficult to domesticate.  Zebras are wild asses, not horses.  Fundamentally, they're different animals than the domesticated horse, much closer to their other ass cousins.  The nobility tried during the sixteenth century to get the beautiful striped animals to haul coaches and abandoned it because they couldn't get the same results as with horses.  So... my suggestion would be to figure out what characteristics you think are important for your animals to have and go from there.  

In Russia, in I think the 70's, when the fur trade was huge, the fox furriers came up with a clever idea.  Why not breed the friendly animals and in doing so, get foxes that were easy to raise.

Problem was, that with descendents of wolves, funny things happen when only the friendly animals breed.  Within 12 generations (or something), the foxes no longer looked like foxes.  They looked like domesticated dogs.  Some had spotted coats, others floppy ears.  They resembled our common pet dog breeds.  SO they abandoned their selective breeding program and instead just bred moody foxes with beautiful coats.  

Domestication takes on several complications, not the least of which being that when you breed an animal for friendliness, intelligence, etc.  You sometimes activate recessive genes and come up with a whole new animal, just within a few decades.  So, if you're looking for a way to make stripey horses, why not go with that?  I personally think the Okapi is a beautiful animal and there's definitely a possibility of creating animal breeds with distinctive color markings.  I guess in closing, I'd say that you should do what you feel is best, but researching domestication of wild animals will lead you to better results.  This animal is a completely different thing, not an antelope, not a giraffe, not a horse, not a deer...

















  Pretty cool huh?  Especially for something most closely related to a giraffe...Maybe you could make a separate species entirely.


----------



## Guru Coyote (Aug 13, 2013)

This thread has really been worth starting 

Yes, Caged Maiden, I am very aware of the Russian 'pet fox' and what it tells us about domestication of wild species... They have been one of the inspirations for my use of 'striped horses' or what ever I end up calling them. Esp. the fact that, when you domesticate a species, you do NOT get an animal that looks like its wild cousins, and just behaves itself. You get... something else, maybe a pet.

One of the key elements for the "Silvertree bloodline" of my world is that they did manage to create a domesticated riding animal that does have the looks of its wild cousins, while all other breeds are very much similar to what we would call horses, no stripes etc.
the idea behind the Silvertree bloodline is along the lines of certain dog breeds that have 'wolf looks' - say the husky etc. (and before someone jumps on me for saying husky looks like wolf.. I know, I know, he does NOT, but people tend to think he does, which is the whole point.)


----------



## Caged Maiden (Aug 13, 2013)

I don't see a problem with that.  The thing I always like to tell people is, "Breaking the rules is fine, as long as you know what rules you're breaking and why."    As long as you have an understanding of exactly what sort of breeding went into your domesticated animal, I think it will be fine.  It sounds like your grasp on domestication is pretty good.  Some people don't understand the intricacies of selective breeding, so I always try to point out the fox example, to let people know how quickly you end up with a new species when you selectively breed for friendliness or whatever.  I'd suggest coming up with a new name altogether, then.  I don't like the thought of calling it a zebra, because technically, a zebra is a wild ass, not a horse, and if you bred them from horses, then they should have their own name.  if, however, they're descended from wild zebras and are domesticated, striped asses... then maybe zebra is a perfect word, but you may want to alter it slightly to differentiate the wild ones from tame.  Maybe Zebri, zebrin, zebrel... i don't know.  Something similar?  

How long has this been a separate species from whatever parent species it branched from?


----------



## Guru Coyote (Aug 13, 2013)

How long... that is a good question.

My current - purely world-building - thought is that the real 'horses' got extinct due to some genetic-related issues (a specific disease etc.) and thus the various zebra species (and ass species) were the only viable option left. Those got domesticated into something that closely resembles our horses in form and function. The Silvertree bloodline is insofar special, as it achieves the coat of wild zebras while still being a rideable and rather friendly breed.
Going from my original notes about 'horses' in my world, I'd say that there are only ancient historical texts that hint at a different species of horses (the ones we know). With that thought, I'd say that the zebra-horses of my world have been domesticated and bred for maybe 600 years at least, as that is how far historical records reach back.... roughly.

There are 'wild cousins' which the breeders of the Silvertree tradition/family were trying to emulate, but just as our 'zebras' consist of several species that can not easily interbreed... I'd say that the domesticated ones are quite separate from them, at least as far apart as our horse and zebra (which can interbreed but will have sterile offspring = mules etc.)


----------



## Ireth (Aug 13, 2013)

An example of a domesticated dog that still looks very much like its wolf cousins is the Czechoslovakian Wolfdog.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Aug 13, 2013)

with that much time involved in the separate breeding of the animals, I don't see any issue with having a separate bloodline that has been very specifically intended for your purposes.  I'd compare it more to cattle breeding though than the fox example, just because equines and bovines are very different than canines in how their temperamental-type genes and their physical appearance genes react.  But, look at appaloosas or dun ponies or steppe ponies or Orlov trotters.  Horses, like dogs, come in all shapes and sizes and are varied in appearance, musculature, attitude and temperament, and work load capabilities.  

You know, I was really amazed to find out that big horses like modern thoroughbreds (as opposed to quarter horses or some smaller breeds), have a load capacity of about 250 pounds.  Wow, really?  Maybe take that into consideration too.  That while Belgian draft horses are monstrous in size, they're gentle giants, bred for so many years to work closely with humans and pull plows, whereas some thoroughbreds (that I've met), are psychotic nut jobs because all they were bred for was speed. Al thoroughbreds are descended from the Godolphin Arabian, just like all German Shepherds are descended from three dogs.  SO you could have started with a very small gene pool for your special breed and it isn't impossible for the mutations to have happened quickly in that case.  Perhaps there's even expeditions to capture wild cousins from time to time to expand the gene pool.  Maybe there's special people who are tasked with finding and acquiring the next generation's breeding stock from the wild.  There's an infinite amount of possibilities here.


----------



## Guru Coyote (Aug 13, 2013)

My little story-mind is buzzing with all the possibilities  
I'll just have to watch out for Madame Silvertree now, or she might hijack the book and make it a history of steed breeding!

As to how to Name the Beast... I do have a solution for that one now, I think, but I will keep that secret for a bit longer, it would be a spoiler for my Iron Pen Round X entry...
What I will say is this: my world has its own calendar system along with a non-standard numerical system. Every day of the calendar has a connection to two animals, which are sorted and thus have numbers. The names for those numbers could well be the common name for the animal in question.


----------

