Curle on Newstead: What on Earth are these?

[Tarbicus]

Curle on Newstead: What on Earth are these? Curle didn't have the foggiest it seems, either, except it's probably armour. Is it now known? Got any ideas?

http://www.curlesnewstead.org.uk/platexxxii.htm


http://www.curlesnewstead.org.uk/177.htm

Bronze Objects of Unknown Use

The group of bronze objects which follows should probably be classed as armour (Plate XXXII.). That is the inference suggested by their shape as well as by the circumstances in which they were discovered. They were found twice, each time in a set of four. The first set was taken, like certain of the helmets, from Pit XXII. The second set came from Pit XXVII, where it was associated with the mountings of the military belt already described. At first sight they look like shoulder-pieces.

Two of the members of each set seem arranged, one for the right, the other for the left side, each of them being furnished with a depending peak at one end. Along the line of the top they measure 77⁄8 inches, and from the top line to the end of the peak 7 inches. The two smaller members of each set are without the depending peaks. Holes have been punched at regular distances round the edge of each of the eight, obviously for attaching leather.

In the set found in Pit XXII, each piece was marked with a number and a name. One of the larger pieces has the number XV punctured upon it, followed by the name SENECIO, scratched with a knife-point in cursive letters, while below this name, and turned the reverse way, a second name has been scratched with a blunter point and much more irregularly. The latter is read by Professor Haverfield as CRESCES. On each of the other three pieces is punctured the number XII, followed by the name SENECIONIS, scratched as before. The members of the set found in Pit XXVII hardly differed from the others in their dimensions. But the holes punched in the edge were much more numerous, while the fragments still adhering made it

[richsc]

they look suspiciously like saddle pommels.

[Robert Vermaat]

they look suspiciously like saddle pommels.

Absolutely. We saw some in Nijmegen last Saturday.

[Tarbicus]

I can't see how they would fit to the contours of a saddle unless they faced outward, so does that mean they would act as armour on the pommels? Anyone got any photos of the Nijmegen ones?

[Praefectusclassis]

Armour or stiffeners perhaps? They indeed do look very similar to the Nijmegen set.

[martijn.wijnhoven]

A reconstruction drawing of such a saddle can be found in:

- Roman Military Equipment by Bishop and Coulston (page 121, 2nd edition)

- Armour of Imperial Rome by Robinson (page 195)

With kind regards,

Martijn

[Iagoba]

I think also in "Late roman cavalry soldier" By Osprey (I´m not sure of the title, sorry :? )

[Paullus Scipio]

.....and see also Peter Connolly's well-known reconstructions of the Gallo-Roman saddle - these are all too obviously the internal bronze stiffeners for the four saddle 'horns'....see for example his "Tiberius Claudius Maximus- the cavalryman" p.31 for example, where he reconstructs just such a saddle, and he also did Magazine articles IIRC.

There is also p.45 et seq "Training the Roman Cavalry" by Ann Hyland.....

[Tarbicus]

Thanks for the further info everyone. So why do people make saddles with soft horns?

Also, as there have been name inscriptions found on them, these horns must have been on the outside, not covered with leather; more bling for one of the blingiest troop types in the army. Otherwise the names would have been stitched on the leather outer, surely.

[Martin Moser]

So why do people make saddles with soft horns?

Probably because many are content with having a single picture of some sort of reconstruction "sources". Copies of copies of copies of ....

Also, as there have been name inscriptions found on them, these horns must have been on the outside, not covered with leather; more bling for one of the blingiest troop types in the army. Otherwise the names would have been stitched on the leather outer, surely.

Quite right, that's what makes the reconstructions we know a bit questionable ...

[Tarbicus]

Thanks Martin, I'm glad to not be the only one who finds reconstructions a bit 'odd' given what we're looking at. :wink:

Given that the two examples in Curle have very different spacings between the holes at the edges, could they have been nail holes to attach them securely to a wooden frame and tree? The hole spacings on two examples in this thread in particular seem to be pretty unreliable for securing to leather with stitching, given the wear and tear it must have endured. Apart from the seat itself, why bother with leather at all at the horns - flashy bronze and lovely wood might look quite fetching? I also believe the Mongolians actually used felt for their saddles, which we know was a reliable material used by the Romans. Instead of leather on the saddle, the leather could have been on the rider's legs perhaps?

[caiusbeerquitius]

But there are several fragments and even almost complete Roman saddle leather pieces. If rebuildt, the bronze "horns" just fit on very nicely. To much for a coincidence, I would say.

[Tarbicus]

But there are several fragments and even almost complete Roman saddle leather pieces. If rebuildt, the bronze "horns" just fit on very nicely. To much for a coincidence, I would say.

Okay, that sounds reasonable. Do they have the owner's name on them? Meaning, were they inside or outside the brass fittings? The leather could have gone on the wood frame and tree, and the brass nailed on top of them.

[TITVS SABATINVS AQVILIVS]

Names inside (scroll down):
http://www.romancoins.info/MilitaryEquipment-Horse.html


Some drawings and text here, Jim. Scroll down after the face masks:

https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/dspace ... 53_037.pdf

Vale,

[Tarbicus]

Thanks Daniele. That's that cleared up for me :wink: