It depends . . .
Posted by Woodhouse on June 29, 1998 at 15:59:24:
In response to Changing horses, written by Constanza on June 29, 1998 at 14:58:00
] When travellers changed horses at an inn (was it an inn, wasn't it?) to whom belonged the new animals? Were they "rented" or bought ? or had to be taken there in advance? what did happen to the tired animals? were they sent home? how? I am completely in the dark in this matter, so anything would help. Thanks
Constanza:
It depends, as did most things during the regency, on money. When one traveled by mail coach, both coach and horses were owned by the Royal Mail and were changed according to a tight schedule at given locations. If you are speaking of traveling post-chaise by private coach, which only the wealthy could do, then in very rare cases an extremely wealthy man might have his own horses "kept" at inns along a frequently traveled route, but I think this was highly unusual, and reserved only for the obscenely rich. Under normal circumstances, it is my understanding that when your horses tired, you rented more and simply stabled your own at the next inn. I suppose you reversed the process when returning. However, I think it was not uncommon to simply travel at a very slow pace, stopping at inns to rest the horses, and often staying overnight. In this way, fresh horses were not necessarily needed. Again, these are my understandings. I would like to see what others have learned from their reading and research.
- Post horses John W 17:18:45 6/29/98
(0)
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.
