In 1859 Hill Carter of Shirley paid $96 for a riding horse for his son.
HBG
---- "Metz wrote:
> This has been a great discussion, and as Ms. Preston knows, one I take a keen interest in as I frequently rely on probate inventories for exploring the economic and social environments in communities bracketing the Civil War. In my experience based on probate data from Georgia, Virginia, Michigan, and Missouri, $80-$90 is a average price for a solid, non-thoroughbred horse which roughly correlates throughout all of the regions I am studying. These are both likely "prime working horses" that could pull a plow and a buggy. While I think that a mare offered breeding potential, I have found that the more generic description of "mare" should not be taken as any explicit indication of the horse being with foal. More often, the appraisers were very cognizant of the potential economic enhancement of breeding stock, or those that were pregnant at the time of appraisement. In the former case, I find that horses intended for use as brood stock are explicitly identified as "brood mare" and "mare in/with foal" or "studs" and "stallions." These also tend to appraise higher than regular working stock, regardless of gender. On a side point, my farming uncles were more apt to purchase brood mares (to breed on their own) or a mare with a foal (one that had already foaled), than they would a pregnant mare as they would say you are taking a risk that one or both of those die while giving birth.
>
> I also believe that the presence of "blooded: or "thoroughbred stock" in southern inventories, especially after the Civil War, is indicative of the intent to breed - many southern states tried to educate their citizenry of the value of pedigree stock, typically cattle, pigs and chickens, in producing larger yields or more disease resistant herds. In the few cases where I have seen these in the South (they seem to more prevalent in Michigan, in my research), they are invariably appraised much higher.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Research and writing about Virginia genealogy and family history. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Madaline Preston
> Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2014 12:16 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [VA-ROOTS] Value of horses in 1860
>
> Thanks to all for your input on mares at $90. Most responses went with mares in foal. Very reasonable explanation..
> M. Preston
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Janice <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Possibly carrying foals?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Madaline Preston <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: VA-ROOTS <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Fri, Apr 4, 2014 1:29 pm
> > Subject: [VA-ROOTS] Value of horses in 1860
> >
> >
> > It seems to me the a gray mare appraised at $90.00 and a strawberry
> > grey mare at $80 in the 1860s is a goodly price for a horse to pull a
> > plow, etc.. Isaac had 3 other mares valued at $30, $ 50 and $15. He
> > did own a barouche and harness....$25 and an assortment of plows, harrows, etc.
> >
> > Any thoughts on the use of these horses would be greatly appreciated.
> > M. Preston
> >
> > To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the
> > instructions at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
> >
> >
> >
> > To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the
> > instructions at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
> >
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
|
