Greek Saddleblankets?

[BigRedBat]

In statuary (and reproductions in books such as the Osprey Greeks), one often sees cavalry riding bareback.

Was this the case, or have blankets been omitted due to artistic convention, or because they would have originally been painted on to the statues?

[hoplite14gr]

Simon,
please do a a search in the "Greek Cavalry" and "Greek Horses" threads
You will even find pottery images answering your query.
Kind regards

[BigRedBat]

Hi Hoplite14gr

Thanks I came acfross this thread;

http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic. ... ght=saddle

In summary it seems to suggest that many or most cavalry would have ridden on padded blankets, although some may have ridden bareback (which I would imagine might have been a bit uncomfortable if near naked).

Thanks,

[hoplite14gr]

Exposed flesh on animals causes sores!
Those who rode without saddle blankets learned the error of their ways in a painful manner. Not only padded blankets but sheep skins too if we trust Hermitage pottery. Although it is debatable if we can talk about sabraques

Two rolls of felt on saddle blanket and you havwe a primitive saddle.
Is is dabatable the excact date of its introduction.

Kind regards

[BigRedBat]

Thanks Hoplite. In my Osprey Secunda "Ancient Greek Warrior", all 8 cavalrymen depicted lack saddleblankets; that's a bit of an omission, then!

Regards,

[hoplite14gr]

Mr. Secunda fevors a very strict conservative approach.
There is ageneral tendency with non academic people to disagree with academics. Experiments some time favor non academic line of thought sometimes prove academics true.
Usually I disagree with the notion that ancients were not observant or that they lacked common sense.
"Gods in color" project of the German museums showed some painted saddle cloths not visible on whit marble.

Most visual reperesntations show also shieldless cavalry while this seems not to be the case.


Kind regards

[BigRedBat]

I've enjoyed his books, but he does sometimes seem to take a very definite positon on things that are open to different interpretations (like the Spartans abandoning the Linothorax, for example), so I treat them with caution.

Thanks again and Laudes,

[MeinPanzer]

Most visual reperesntations show also shieldless cavalry while this seems not to be the case.

I'm curious what time period you're referring to, and why you think they did carry shields.

I've enjoyed his books, but he does sometimes seem to take a very definite positon on things that are open to different interpretations (like the Spartans abandoning the Linothorax, for example), so I treat them with caution.

Thanks again and Laudes,

Sekunda in general is an excellent researcher and is just about the only academic who is widely read and publishes extensively in the area of ancient arms and armour, but he certainly has some quirks to his scholarship. It's a shame that so many of his publications - publications which are oftentimes the only such works accessible to the general public - are tinged with many of his peculiar opinions and strange reconstructions. His Hellenistic Montvert titles are perfect examples of this: they are the only Osprey-style publications to date devoted to the Seleucid and Ptolemaic armies. While they provide numerous very interesting archaeological sources and thorough textual references, his theories of Romanization are extremely tenuous, with many of his assertions being easily refuted with only a basic acquaintance of the evidence, and so the uninformed reader takes it as gospel because this is the only resource published on the matter. Looking through the colour plates from the Seleucid Army title, there is not a single one that does not have a strange or erroneous reconstruction in it.

[hoplite14gr]

Most visual reperesntations show also shieldless cavalry while this seems not to be the case.

I'm curious what time period you're referring to, and why you think they did carry shields.

http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=22339
(interesting images The marble one from Corinthos museum is 5th century)

Kind regards

[Kineas]

I have to say that I recently (see another thread) did a day of javelin throwing on horseback in period kit, and we were bareback, and it never bothered me at all. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that saddle blankets are more for the horse than the rider, and if you use multiple horses you won't really need a pad. But again, and many non-riders don't understand this--every horse is different, with a different back and a different profile and, frankly, a different amount of fat over the contact area. A bony or high-back bone would be very uncomfortable and you'd want a pad every time-so would the horse!

But there's no single truth, and riding bareback on a the right horse with no blanket is comfortable and you can do it for days. Some where on this list there's pictures!

[BigRedBat]

So it is feasible that saddlecloths, or the lack of them, could come down to a matter of personal preference (and whether a horse is bony, or not!). Presumably, more heavily equipped horsemen would be more likely to require one.

Thanks

[Kineas]

That sounds right to me. I don't KNOW. I just did a little experimental archeology...

Only fair to say that in general, I go with contemporary illustrations unless they can be PROVEN incorrect. After all, they were there and we're just guessing... Attic redware and black ware shows both saddle blankets and no saddle blankets.

[BigRedBat]

Thanks, Kineas, that's useful!

[Peter Raftos]

One of the criteria set out in his work on horsemanship is that when you select a horse it should have: A "double spine" (fleshy back), which is softer and more comfortable, as well as prettier . See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Horsemanship_