Interested in Roman Riding?

[John Conyard]

Hello Cesar,

Your post caught me on an extended site visit. I spent a day thinking your suggestion was without merit, and a day trying to come to terms with the idea in a fair minded way. This must be a warning to me, I must be getting narrow minded in my old age.

You are suggesting the Roman saddle has parallels to the Spanish vaquera traditional saddle, where the pommel and cantle are connected with leather tubes filled traditionally with rye grass or reed. This is a flexible saddle which will fit a variety of horses, generally with long backs. http://www.animoruitersport.nl/vaquera.htm My version is too long for Hal who is small by any standard.

[attachment=2:32d1an5j]<!-- ia2 Spanish saddle.JPG<!-- ia2 [/attachment:32d1an5j]

This is a medieval design and sometimes I play with it as such. It is a “soft” saddle and unlike Spanish and Portuguese bull fighting saddles which are related to the steppe saddle and later military saddles, with two cantles linked to side boards. The vaquera saddle relies on two massive pads, traditionally made of breathable linen, to cushion the saddle on the horse. It is in some ways a poor mans saddle, and similar to a pack saddle. It does have parallels to other saddle designs which use wood rather than stuffed leather tubes.

[attachment=1:32d1an5j]<!-- ia1 asaddle5.jpg<!-- ia1 [/attachment:32d1an5j]

I suspect that very early saddles could be made simply of wooden cantles and felt pads. This could describe a form of Skythian saddle. I suppose the German reconstruction of the Roman saddle with its steel cantles giving basic rigidity to two leather pads is similar. But the last two German four horns I’ve played with had floppy horns and little lateral stability with the front of the saddle operating independently to the rear of the saddle. I suspect they are just poor saddles as well as poor reconstructions. The use of steel cantles is questionable and the massive and weight and size of such reconstructions seem a little pointless.

However I still believe in the wooden tree for some simple reasons.

With Cesar’s suggestion the strength of the cantles would be vital, as would be the way the side boards/leather tubes/wooden dowel are attached to give lateral stability. Of course there two holes in the possible cantle from Carslisle.

[attachment=0:32d1an5j]<!-- ia0 Carslisle cantle.JPG<!-- ia0 [/attachment:32d1an5j]

The top slot does seem to be for suspending a leather or rawhide seat, as with many military saddles. The side hole seems possible for fitting a sideboard raher a series of leather tubes. But this is not conclusive.

I suspect that if I was covering a Roman saddle made from two cantles joined by leather tubes I would not use a single piece of leather as are found associated with Roman four horns. Instead I would rather cover the cantles and horns separately, if at all, then cover the seat, as is the case with the vaquera.

And I would rather use wooden sideboards compared to leather tubes because they are easy to make and attach, are stronger for military use and require no padding. A Roman four horn made from two cantles and two sideboards, plus four horns, would produce a design from which the steppe saddle could naturally evolve. And every other military saddle since then.

Leather tubes and thin sticks could be used for pack saddles.

But this is supposition, and I suspect a fairer answer to your question would be we just don’t know.

[LUCIUS ALFENUS AVITIANUS]

Thanks!!!

My english writing is very poor, and i have many troubles and lack of vocabulary to express exactly what i mean...

I have thought in the "bars" or pieces connecting the fork with the cantle made of pieces of thick leather instead of wood. Not tubes, pieces of plain leather made in such tickness that could be quite rigid, but with a plus of elasticity that the wood lacks.

Anyway, i have not thought in the side holes present in the preserved wooden piece you have showed. And, of course, we have the paralels of the mongolian saddles, with the sideboards made of wood.

So, probably you are right and the side boards were made in wood. My question is if the inner side of the side boards were left plain or have to be "wavy" to adapt the carcass of the horse? How is made in your late roman saddle?

I have to agree that if the sideboards could be left plain, it could be very easy to made.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Just a question if I may, as I am unfamilair with the details of saddle consrtuction. Could these side boards you mention not have been wood with a leather covering?

[John Conyard]

The side boards do have to be shaped to the horse. I love the shape of the sideboards on old 19th century military saddles because they were designed to fit a variety horses, although smaller than some large horses today. However their shape is generally a good starting point. Hence some time ago I suggested using old McClellan trees as a basis for four horned and steppe style saddles.

Simple wooden trees could be covered in rawhide since the rawhide will shrink and pull joints together. Thuis was done on the McClellan saddle. After a while during the Indian wars the rawhide was covered in leather to improve waterproofing and stop the rawhide soaking up moisture. Indeed at Chillingham Castle, the site of our first event, Sir Humphrey Wakefield has a fine collection of saddles and tack including this simple steppe-style wooden tree partially held together using rawhide thongs. These thongs would pull the joint togther.

[attachment=0:3w4gvw08]<!-- ia0 CIMG7742.JPG<!-- ia0 [/attachment:3w4gvw08]

What a simple delightful design.

But general issue military saddles are left without integral padding. My British Universal Pattern (UP) is a relatively recent buy from Horse Guards and has a thick wad of felt glued on to the sideboards, but in the past they were left bare like the McClellan.

Most reconstructions of Roman saddles have the leather cover stiched underneath the wooden frame holding in lots of padding to make the saddle more comfortable for the horse. However there is now a very good case for the saddle cover to be pulled over the wooden frame and left hanging down the sides of the horse as with the Carslisle finds. This would leaves the sideboards as just bare wood, as with the steppe saddle and most military saddles. Padding would be provided by furs and the saddle cloth. These are folded in various ways to make the wooden frame fit whatever shape of horse. 19th century troopers were taught to fold their saddle blankets in different ways to make their saddle fit their horse as it lost condition through a campaign, and I believe Roman troopers would do something similar.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Would this design have the flexability to allow the horns to still grip the riders legs?
I understood that function to be the key to the four horned design?

[John Conyard]

I don't fully understand your question so I'll try and answer all possibilities.

With the wooden frame the horns are very firm. Not flexible. You only really notice them properly when jumping, when going over rough terrain or using your upper body. They are there just in case, otherwise you just sit on the saddle. The more you relax the leg the better it is. Kind of bareback but with the added back-up of a saddle just in case.

In a German pad saddle you sink into the saddle and the horns close around your legs. You are in it no matter what and will go down with the horse if there is a problem. In some examples the horns are so floppy they give no support.

In a steppe saddle such as the photo above you ride with a very straight leg and a deep seat, avoiding any muscle cramps. When you turn you make sure your insdie leg is very straight and very deep. A rope stirrup is the next logically "step".

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

That answers my question.
I had understood the horns on the (gallo/roman) 4 horn saddle gripped the legs when your weight was on the saddle.
I had thought about the potential of the falling scenario, but had thought that perhaps in that event, you weight would no longer be on the saddle, so the chances were, you could still manage to get clear of the horse....maybe!

Now I don't recall if this description of the horns 'gripping ' the riders legs came from scources, or is a modern interpretation.
There is also the bronze reinforcement of the horns.

But, in the event that this description is from ancient sources, it would seem to point away from the wooden frame, going by what you say.

[John Conyard]

Ancient sources don't say much about the horns except a reference to their stuffing, which is interesting.

The horns are there as an aid, but you should not rely on them all the time. In reality I expect many people do.

[Lepidina]

I just bimbled onto this thread and I am very jealous! I would love to get a Roman cav group together here in the States. *sigh* One of these days. Good to know that there are decent replica saddles on the market, if somewhat limited. Hopefully I can get on over here and try it out or at least get over to your side of the pond for a test ride.

[John Conyard]

You would be welcome over here to test drive a Roman four-horn. I have been contacted by lots of people in Canada and the USA regarding Roman riding so there must be an interest in the subject over there. I think many people had problems getting horses that were small enough to look Roman. As do we.

[Lepidina]

But you have all those cute pony breeds over there - Dales, Fell, New Forest, etc. We've got plenty of ponies over here but most adults own horses. Ponies are for kids (and polo players ). Being 5'3", I have no problems riding a pony and don't even look out of place on them. Apparently our wild mustangs are very similar to Roman horses as they are descended from the horses of the early Spanish explorers and haven't changed much over the years. They tend to be smaller, in the 14-15hh range but I have seen them get to 16hh. Mustangs are relatively cheap too but you have to train them from scratch since they are feral. I would think that the Icelandics wouldn't be too bad as Roman horses either. They are sturdy but not too "chunky" like Hafingers for Fjords.

[LUCIUS ALFENUS AVITIANUS]

I have some questions.

Is threre a relationship between the size of the horse and the weight it could transport? Could a pony carry a complet weaponed soldier over a lot of kilometers? Or it depend too form what breed is used?

Of course, i hope a little horse will run less than a bigger one, because the lenghtness of the legs. But what about the resistence?

I like very much spanish breeds like Pottoka, Asturcones o Pura Raza Gallega, but there are horses between 120-130 cms. I will not have troubles in use one of them, but first i have to know if i can use one of them for long time traveling mounted.

[John Conyard]

I think we are too often fixated by modern breads when discussing the size and form of the Roman horse. I met somebody last year who assured me at some length the modern Fell pony was “the” Roman horse.

We have some contemporary written evidence, pictorial evidence and skeletal evidence. I would aim for something that looked native, is around 14 hands, and can carry your weight plus armour and equipment. Small horses such as cobs are capable of carrying immense loads. And although speed is a secondary consideration, Hal at just 14 hands is very very fast.

Hal has only ever seen his first home, and the yard. Last weekend he was introduced to the “wider world” at his first event. There were streams, lakes, cows, PA systems, crowds, tents etc. He was a useful addition to the display because of his size and speed, but we didn’t hit very much. It was frustrating. We even parted company at one stage. But it was a learning experience for him.

Directly after a show the owner of the estate took two of us one a great little ride across his primeval estate which even contained primeval cattle. We went across rough terrain and managed to get our horses to jump a stream bless them. It was a small stream, but we jumped it as if it was a small river. It was a great experience for us, and it felt fantastic to be riding fully equipped, through such rough terrain and forest. I’ve always considered forests as suitable places for light infantry, but heavy cavalry can climb and descend nearly vertical banks and barge through thickets and under-growth. And we travelled at a speed infantry could not match. We will not get the opportunity to do that again for a while.

[John Conyard]

This was during light order training the day before the show.

[attachment=0:3ei7o5n3]<!-- ia0 Hal and castle.JPG<!-- ia0 [/attachment:3ei7o5n3]

[Lepidina]

He's so cute!!

On pony breeds, it's true that the little guys can carry a lot of weight. For example, Icelandics don't get much bigger than 14hh and EVERYONE in Iceland rides them because there are no other horse breeds. Icelanders aren't small people so it can be very amusing to see this 6ft+ guy on the back of this pony with his feet almost hanging to the ground.

Also, if you know how to ride well, you will be less strain on a horse's back than if you were lighter but didn't know how to ride. Good riders know how to follow a horse's movement and absorb the shock of the horse's gaits. An untrained rider is like a big deadweight so the horse has to work harder.