+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Roman Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: (Another) Roman Saddle Question (/showthread.php?tid=21364)
(Another) Roman Saddle Question - Vindex - 05-29-2013
Well, I haven't asked one in a long while and there is something which has been bugging me for a very, very, very long time.
Why would one need to add metal "stiffners" to a wooden tree and wooden horned saddle? Why does the wood need reinforcement?
Or, might it suggest that the horns weren't made of wood at all but stuffed and then reinforced with the the metal?
(Another) Roman Saddle Question - caiusbeerquitius - 05-29-2013
Quote:Or, might it suggest that the horns weren't made of wood at all but stuffed and then reinforced with the the metal?That´s what I´ve always been thinking.
(Another) Roman Saddle Question - mcbishop - 05-30-2013
Quote:Why would one need to add metal "stiffners" to a wooden tree and wooden horned saddle? Why does the wood need reinforcement?Perhaps because the wooden horns were simple pegs and were given shape by a combination of stuffing and the metal plates.
Mike Bishop
(Another) Roman Saddle Question - Michael Kerr - 05-30-2013
Hi, pardon my ignorance on this subject but what sort of materials would they use for stuffing?
Regards
Michael Kerr
Michael Kerr
(Another) Roman Saddle Question - Vindex - 05-30-2013
Thank you for your replies Christian and Mike.
Quote:Hi, pardon my ignorance on this subject but what sort of materials would they use for stuffing?
Regards
Michael Kerr
There's many natural substances which are still used in saddlery today around the world - carded wool, "raw" wool, feathers, straw...
Without wishing in any way to diminish the excellent theories of Peter Connolly (whom sadly, having waited for so long to hone my theories, I can no longer approach on this matter
) and Junkelmann (whose ideas I think I am closer to), the evidence of stress marks on the leather saddle covers and fragments found and the use of a wooden frame on a horse's back from far more limited archaeological evidence, seems a leap too far in the development of the saddle. I am sure as the rider became more armoured, the saddle had to provide stronger support, but that still has nothing to do with stirrups.One of my main reasons for querying this is the profile of the mounted rider seen in epigraphic evidence, and the saddle, too, for that matter and reconstructions of the saddle I have seen from the very good to the truly awful.
(Another) Roman Saddle Question - jvrjenivs - 05-30-2013
Moi, I think I'm with you.
You couls also see if you could discuss your questions with both Wouter Nicolay and Martin Becker, who both did quite some research on the saddle design recently. Wouters newest saddle proves to have a very interesting approach used.
(Another) Roman Saddle Question - Robert - 05-30-2013
Funny, but untill you posted that question, I had always thought of the horns as being simply integral projections stitched from strong saddle leather and stuffed tightly, with the base of the saddle and the padding for the seat then stitched on to the underside. I had never even contemplated them being stretched over a wooden frame. Not having a ridgid wooden frame with crossbars would in my mind make a saddle more suited to use with different horses.
(Another) Roman Saddle Question - PhilusEstilius - 05-30-2013
I did hear once in the past that there was never any wood head tree or horns in a Roman saddle, and I may stand corrected but was this not the way that one of the foremost practical experts such as Junkelmann who proved this.
(Another) Roman Saddle Question - Vindex - 06-05-2013
Quote:Moi, I think I'm with you.
You couls also see if you could discuss your questions with both Wouter Nicolay and Martin Becker, who both did quite some research on the saddle design recently. Wouters newest saddle proves to have a very interesting approach used.
Sorry Jurjen, just found this.
There was quite a bit of email correspondence between us about this idea and I thought we were working towards a reconstruction. Sadly Wouter then decided he wanted to make the tree out of carbon fibre, which rather defeats the object in my book! (My version of a trooper helmet!!) I wouldn't choose to have a carbon fibre shield or bow, or a sword made of anything other than metal, as I want to know HOW the saddle works not just sit on a horse!
(Another) Roman Saddle Question - mcbishop - 06-06-2013
Quote:I did hear once in the past that there was never any wood head tree or horns in a Roman saddle, and I may stand corrected but was this not the way that one of the foremost practical experts such as Junkelmann who proved this.Junkelmann didn't prove anything, he merely speculated that it was so. Connolly and van Driel-Murray had the proof in the leather covers. The coincidence of those leather saddle covers and the copper-alloy saddle horns remains too close to be so lightly dismissed. The metal horns do not go on the outside as some have suggested (otherwise why have leather appliqué designs on the saddle covers?), so presumably go inside in some way as yet to be satisfactorily explained (but just because it hasn't been explained doesn't mean we all have to give up and opt for a shapeless beanbag). A possible wooden saddle component was found in the Carlisle Millennium excavations.
Mike Bishop
(Another) Roman Saddle Question - Renatus - 06-06-2013
Quote:Why would one need to add metal "stiffners" to a wooden tree and wooden horned saddle? Why does the wood need reinforcement?My idea is that where the horns are let into the wooden frame is a point of weakness and that the metal stiffeners reinforce the joint to help prevent the horns breaking free under the stresses of battle.
(Another) Roman Saddle Question - Crispvs - 06-21-2013
In addition to the possible saddle tree component from Carlisle, I am sure I recall seeing the clear marks of the bars of the saddle frames, impressed onto both of the saddle covers from Carlisle, The extant flaps on the covers, which would have hung down over the horses' sides, argued against the saddles having been sewn under. The stitched edges of the cover from Valkenburg that Connolly had theorised might be sewn to missing pieces which passed under the frame to enclose it were shown from the Carlise evidence to be the edges to which the flaps mentioned above were sewn, strongly suggesting that the Valkenburg cover had lost its flaps. This then allows for the possibility that the saddle covers could be removed from their frames, which might also suggest a reason why some metal 'stiffener' plates had names punched or scratched into them. If the cover was removed they would be visible.
I like Mike's suggestion of the horns of the frame being little more than pegs. Having stuffed horns mounted on pegs might allow for stuffing to be tailored to the rider's shape and size with the stiffeners stitched to them to maintain the correct shape. If the horns were effectively tailored to the rider's shape that would also be a good reason for them to be labelled with ownership marks. If the Carlisle covers are anything to go by, some saddle covers might have been repaired several times throughout their lifetimes, necessitating each time the temporary separation of cover and frame, which would then need to be matched up again.
Alternatively, as it is likely that cavalrymen would have walked alongside their horses for a proportion of the time rather than riding them the length of a long journey, could it have been the case that saddle covers were removed when on foot to allow the frame to perform some carrying function which was easier to do with the frame exposed.? Given that some stiffener plates are embossed with raised lines, it might suggest that they were expected to be visible at least part of the time.
As Mike says, the applique patches on the horn parts of the covers argue against their being covered by the metal plates, leaving the frame the only place these sometimes decorated pieces might be displayed.
Crispvs
(Another) Roman Saddle Question - mcbishop - 06-21-2013
Quote:As Mike says, the applique patches on the horn parts of the covers argue against their being covered by the metal plates, leaving the frame the only place these sometimes decorated pieces might be displayed.Ah, but was that decoration or was it functional reinforcement in the form of a corrugation or even a means of reducing slippage?
Mike Bishop
(Another) Roman Saddle Question - jvrjenivs - 06-21-2013
Quote:The metal horns do not go on the outside as some have suggested (otherwise why have leather appliqué designs on the saddle covers?), so presumably go inside in some way as yet to be satisfactorily explained (but just because it hasn't been explained doesn't mean we all have to give up and opt for a shapeless beanbag).
Although I totally agree with your ideas here, I would say that isn't always the case. If we look at the set of horn-bronzes found at the Kops plateau Nijmegen, it seems there is a double set of horns, with plain ones for under the leather and decorated ones for on top of the leatherwork.
As for the carlisle saddle covers, of which I'm currently finishing a reproductions, there indeed is no sign of any horn-bronses on top of the leather.
It is furthemore worth noting that accompanied with some of these horn-bronses some metal bars have been found (Pers. comm. Harry van Enckevort) which are not fully published and recognised as such, but may well be metal components of the saddle tree.
(Another) Roman Saddle Question - mcbishop - 06-21-2013
Quote:it seems there is a double set of horns, with plain ones for under the leather and decorated ones for on top of the leatherwork.Specifically which decorated horns are we talking about here?
Mike Bishop