Roman -celtic and German wooden saddles

[cinzia8]

Hi all:

 

I have a new research question for my novel. I want to have a character place his hand on the cantle of a 5th century wooden saddle. I did a little searching and I think the more accurate term would be "rear horn." Does anyone know if this is the most accurate term? I found this on "Historical Interpretations." This man in England makes and rides Roman-Celtic/ German pads saddles. Any thoughts appreciated.

 

Cinzia

[Melvadius]

It seems as good a term as any since I don't think we have any written Romans descriptions of saddles.

 

I couldn't find a specific reference to saddles (except saddle-cloths) in my copy of Greek and Roman Technology: A Sourcebook by Humphrey, Oleson & Sherwood and that was a passing mention by Xenophon, Art of Horsemanship 12.1-12 but since I believe he was writing around 400 BC rather than in the Roman period it doesn't really help.

[GhostOfClayton]

Surely, by the 5th Century, the higher tech Hunnic saddle or Steppe saddle would have been adopted.

 

A few years ago, there was a discussion on Roman Army Talk about this.

 

Link

[cinzia8]

Thanks guys.

 

This is the site I found with pictures etc. On second review, the saddle pictured on the far left of the photo is a steppe saddle. If you look at this, it might take a few seconds for the text to appear. Do you think "rear horn" gives the reader an accurate frame of reference or picture?

 

Cinzia

 

My link

[GhostOfClayton]

There's bound to a technical name. I'd be tempted to contact Histrical Interpretations.They can only ignore you.

[GhostOfClayton]

NB On a modern saddle, the raised bit the back is known as the Cantle.

 

To quote Wikipedia

The North Iranian Eurasian nomads known in Europe as Scythians and in Asia as Saka developed an early form of saddle, which included two parallel leather cushions, with girth attached to them, a pommel and cantle with detachable bone/horn/hardened leather facings, leather thongs, a crouper and breastplate, and a felt shabrack adorned with animal motifs located in the Pazyryk finds

Edited December 29, 2011 by GhostOfClayton

[Fulvia]

Thanks guys.

 

This is the site I found with pictures etc. On second review, the saddle pictured on the far left of the photo is a steppe saddle. If you look at this, it might take a few seconds for the text to appear. Do you think "rear horn" gives the reader an accurate frame of reference or picture?

 

Cinzia

 

My link

 

If I were to read that, I would have in mind a horn much like modern western saddles have. If the only import it plays is having your character rest his hand upon it, then that description would be fine in my reading of it.

[cinzia8]

Thanks guys.

 

This is the site I found with pictures etc. On second review, the saddle pictured on the far left of the photo is a steppe saddle. If you look at this, it might take a few seconds for the text to appear. Do you think "rear horn" gives the reader an accurate frame of reference or picture?

 

Cinzia

 

My link

 

If I were to read that, I would have in mind a horn much like modern western saddles have. If the only import it plays is having your character rest his hand upon it, then that description would be fine in my reading of it.

 

Good, cantle is a familiar frame of reference but "rear horn" is really more accurate. Thanks. Cinzia

[caldrail]

Surely, by the 5th Century, the higher tech Hunnic saddle or Steppe saddle would have been adopted.

 

A few years ago, there was a discussion on Roman Army Talk about this.

 

Link

There's no confirmation of this earlier than the 6th century. The presence of huns was not significant in terms of hardware change until they were settled, and even then the stirrups and saddle types filtered westward gradually. Bear in mind however that the hunnish versions were not intrinsically superior.

 

There is also the idea that tradition/culture was a dampening factor in that new styles of riding hardware were not necessarily immediately adopted. The pronged saddle had been in use for centuries in the west. It was familiar, did what was expected of it, and perfectly suited to the light cavalry roles undertaken by ancient horsemen. Why would they need to change it?

 

The only reason would be the increasing prevalence of cavalry in warfare into the sub-roman world and the arms race resulting, one that was slowed down by the breeding of larger horses capable of carrying extra weight - the early cataphractii were not known for cavalry charges because they were wary of tiring out their horses which were no bigger than anyone elses and carried all that extra weight into battle. In fact, they rarely galloped at all, one reason for the slow acceptance of heavy cavalry.

 

Cavalrymen were practical people and required riding support in context of their fighting style (thus not until the popularity of jousting in the medieval period emerge did the need for high back saddles follow). Stirrups for instane are often quoted as a ground breaking advance that allowed this that or the other, but in reality, their main benefit was comfort and functionally the stirrup had little effect.

 

I think it's a myth to regard the hunnic saddle as 'higher tech'. It just wasn't, and bear in mind it was developed by a nomadic tribal society who specialised in light cavalry raids.

[cinzia8]

Surely, by the 5th Century, the higher tech Hunnic saddle or Steppe saddle would have been adopted.

 

A few years ago, there was a discussion on Roman Army Talk about this.

 

Link

There's no confirmation of this earlier than the 6th century. The presence of huns was not significant in terms of hardware change until they were settled, and even then the stirrups and saddle types filtered westward gradually. Bear in mind however that the hunnish versions were not intrinsically superior.

 

There is also the idea that tradition/culture was a dampening factor in that new styles of riding hardware were not necessarily immediately adopted. The pronged saddle had been in use for centuries in the west. It was familiar, did what was expected of it, and perfectly suited to the light cavalry roles undertaken by ancient horsemen. Why would they need to change it?

 

The only reason would be the increasing prevalence of cavalry in warfare into the sub-roman world and the arms race resulting, one that was slowed down by the breeding of larger horses capable of carrying extra weight - the early cataphractii were not known for cavalry charges because they were wary of tiring out their horses which were no bigger than anyone elses and carried all that extra weight into battle. In fact, they rarely galloped at all, one reason for the slow acceptance of heavy cavalry.

 

Cavalrymen were practical people and required riding support in context of their fighting style (thus not until the popularity of jousting in the medieval period emerge did the need for high back saddles follow). Stirrups for instane are often quoted as a ground breaking advance that allowed this that or the other, but in reality, their main benefit was comfort and functionally the stirrup had little effect.

 

I think it's a myth to regard the hunnic saddle as 'higher tech'. It just wasn't, and bear in mind it was developed by a nomadic tribal society who specialised in light cavalry raids.

 

 

 

I would encourage any that are interested to go to the link I posted earlier and view the photo and the subtitle "Saddles."

 

["At first Roman saddles and tack seemed a far away dream. Now we have lots of them, currently eight good saddles, one truly flexible German pad saddle, and three more good saddles on their way. Seeing good reproductions being used positively cheers me up. We are making our saddles available to others who are interested in Roman riding. Sadly there are some incredibly bad saddles being used in shows in the UK. I have seen saddles cast from resin, modern general purpose (GP) saddles with covers made for them so they look like Roman saddles, and even a cowboy saddle with horns sewn on. Often you may see a GP saddle covered in a sheep skin, or stirrups being used. There seems no excuse for his, and the public are not all stupid and deserve the highest level of authenticity.

 

We use two Peter Connolly

[caldrail]

It's unlikely the hunnish style caught on. I don't recall any evidence of wooden saddles in Roman or sub-roman use.

[Melvadius]

Cinzia,

 

You may have some or most of this already from the site you linked to but you may find the dedicated Comitatus cavalry research pages of interest and may give a slightly different emphasis.