Roman saddles look somewhat different from the English ones I'm used to. They're probably closer to Western saddles though my experience with those is limited to one ride, and it felt pretty unusual for someone trained in the classical style.
Roman saddle from the side; the horse's head would be to the right
Since Roman saddles had no stirrups, they used four horns to support the rider. It's quite comfortable, but movements are more limited than with stirrups. If you want to stand up to have more swinging room for a cavalry spatha, you need to rely on pressing knees and lower legs against the horse's flancs. Stirrups were an improvement there. Also, the horns can get in the way if you want to turn in the saddle to fight someone sneaking up from behind. Roman saddle seen from the front angle
I'm not sure if most auxiliary cavarly used the same sort of saddle - we know from the Numidian mounted archers that they used no saddle at all but only a blanket. Heavy cavalry like the Parthian cataphracti used a saddle of similar style to keep a firm seat to balance the impact of a close attack with the lance. Cataphracti can be compared to Mediaeval knights to some extent, only the latter knew stirrups. But Mediaeval saddles are different from modern ones in having higher support in front and back as well.Pictures taken in Carlisle Museum.
The saddles look fairly comfortable. I don't know why that surprised me! Interesting post.
ReplyDeleteThe saddle felt comfortable. I'd like to find out it it still does afer several hours cross country ride, or if I would miss the stirrups then.
ReplyDeleteI train in these saddles as an reenactor. I have done point to point in these saddles. the hardest part is galloping. your thighs dont half hurt. but very comfortable and for me more comfey than an english.
ReplyDelete