I am enjoying your Eastern input into the Romano-Celtic saddle debate. It displays a different angle on an old discussion. The argument that the copper alloy plates may help protect the saddle or the rider is one I have read before. But to be honest in a context of an armoured saddle it would not matter too much if the plates were mounted eternally or internally. The fact that individual names are recorded on the plates my suggest they could be used for identification purposes. But the existing leather saddle covers probably give more glues to the nature of construction. The idea that the leather cover can hang down either side of the frame and that it could be removed is a major potential step forward. Below is one of the covers from Carlisle.
[attachment=0:36ifathd]<!-- ia0 saddle cover 2nd century Carlisle.jpg<!-- ia0 [/attachment:36ifathd]
May I ask how heavy your saddle is? My saddle is a light 4.8kg design, easily carried and stored, with very little padding for the riders comfort. The second saddle I used was a little larger, at 5.2 kg, while Connolly’s initial reconstruction was 6.8kg. The variance partly being due to size, the copper alloy stiffeners or lack of them, and the amount of stuffing in the saddle. Padded versions of these saddles made without a wooden frame often have a metal bar towards the front of the saddle for stability. Reconstructions are generally very heavy at 11-12kg, and larger than examples based on a wooden frame.
Roman cavalry harness fittings can be purchased from a whole range of traders.
http://www.armamentaria.com/store/index ... Path=13_38 is a good start. But the fittings must represent the period you are trying to represent. Reconstructions of tack from the 1st and 2nd centuries are generally highly decorated with copper alloy fittings, often tinned or silvered, based on archaeological finds. Few such fittings date from the 4th or 5th centuries. However throughout the Roman period there was large scale use of amulets on horse tack made from the bases of shed antlers. The denticulated edge is no more than the natural coronet of the burr, channelled and perforated by the presence of blood vessels in the velvet during growth. One or more holes drilled in the disc allowed for suspension from the harness. The most common design is the phallus, perhaps to ward off the evil eye, and the use of antler may suggest that it had some special talismanic significance.
John Conyard
York
A member of
Comitatus Late Roman
Reconstruction Group
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.comitatus.net">http://www.comitatus.net
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.historicalinterpretations.net">http://www.historicalinterpretations.net
<a class="postlink" href="http://lateantiquearchaeology.wordpress.com">http://lateantiquearchaeology.wordpress.com