The plight of the horses during the war

During the Anglo-Boer War, both sides relied on mounted troops, and the casualties suffered by these animals were massive. It is widely regarded, proportionally, as the most devastating waste of horses in military history up until that time.

On the British side, 326,073 horses and 51,399 mules died between October 1899 and May 1902, representing 66.88% and 35.37% of the total headcount, respectively. Many donkeys were also in service, but these figures are unknown.

Meanwhile, the Boers and their agterryers (mounted African workers for Boer fighters) provided their own horses on commando. Agterryers had been pivotal on commando, caring for the horses, maintaining tack, ensuring they were fed, and guarding them at night.

The British army mustered a mounted force larger than any they had ever mobilised before and then transported it 10,000 kilometres to South Africa—farther than it had ever had to do.

Prof Sandra Swart, an environmental historian working on the relationship between people and animals, writes about what happened:

“On board ship, horses were compelled to stand in stalls during their weeks at sea, unable to roll or lie down. Occasionally, insufficient fodder was packed, and horses simply starved to death. Aeration was inadequate, and the stalls were poorly designed, which made it difficult to muck out the decaying dung and excoriating urine.

“It was not so much the voyage that killed them but its aftermath: its debilitating effects coupled with the absence of an acclimatization period. In the absence of acclimatization depots, horses would arrive incapacitated—dehydrated, malnourished, and their immune systems severely compromised—and instead of having the weeks or months needed to revive, they would be transported to the front almost at once.

“There were insufficient supplies, which entrenched constant low-level malnutrition. The Remount Commission was increasingly condemned, but its remit was extremely difficult from the very outset. The Remount depot itself was seen as a kind of exile—a “Siberia” for incompetent officers.”

Horses were shipped from England, Ireland, the United States, Australia, New Zealand, Austro-Hungary, Russia, Argentina, and India.

It is important to note that horses are not all the same and have their own “culture”. Those from Argentina formerly lived in little semi-wild herds. Each herd always had one “bell mare” whom the others were trained to follow. When separated for remount work in South Africa, they would panic about the loss of the mare and grew emaciated, pining for their erstwhile companions.

For the horses of the imperial forces, eating unusual fodder, drinking too much water after hard work, being left out in very hot or very cold weather, and encountering unfamiliar pathogens and alien plants could all mean death. They were also much more prone to disease than the local horses known as the Boerperd breed.

Swart writes that horses hide pain as prey animals, due to the evolution of their survival instincts so as not to appear as the weak animal in the herd, which would draw a predator’s watchful eye. 

On the Boer side, General Ben Viljoen noted that “quite one-third of the horses we had taken with us were untrained for the serious business of fighting, and also that many of the new burghers of foreign nationality [foreigners fighting on the Boer side] had not the slightest idea how to ride. Our first parade, or ‘Wapenschouwing,’ gave food for much hilarity. Here one saw horses waltzing and jumping, while over there a rider was biting the sand, and towards evening the doctors had several patients”

A British officer bluntly said that many mounted men “did not know whether to feed [their horses] on beef or mutton”.

Both British and Boers believed themselves quintessential horsemen. Ironically, styles and equipment perceived to be particularly characteristic of either side were commonly used by both sides. They disparaged the other’s equestrian skills and thought the other side did not love or care for their horses.

But there are many descriptions from both sides of how the men cared for and loved these animals, without which they could not survive in the vast landscape.

Swart continues: After the capture of Bloemfontein in early 1900, a British officer described the horrific state of the horses with empathy: “From side to side this living skeleton swayed and crossed its hind legs if compelled to move. When tied up in batches they leant against each other, and the centres collapsed under the pressure . . . These wrecks of war, this flotsam and jetsam of human passions and strife, these helpless victims of a policy of the grossest cruelty and gravest injustice, were dying by hundreds . . .”

Sources:

1. Swart, S. The world the horses made—a South African case study of writing animals into social history, International Review of Social History.

2. Swart, S. Horses in the South African War, c. 1899-1902. Society and Animals 18 (2010) 348-366.

3. Viljoen, B. (1902). My reminiscences of the Anglo-Boer War.

4. Marquess of Anglesey. (1986). A history of the British cavalry.