Lieber Stefan,

anbei Literatur:

Sigrid Alföldy-Thomas, Anschirrungszubehör und Hufbeschläge von Zugtieren. In: E. Künzl, Die Alamannenbeute aus dem Rhein bei Neupotz. Plünderungsgut aus dem römischen Gallien. Teil 1: Untersuchungen. Monographien RGZM 34,1, Mainz 1993, 331-344.

Walter Drack, Hufeisen - entdeckt in, auf und über der römischen Straße in Oberwinterthur (Vitudurum). Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Hufeisens. Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter 55, München 1990, 191-239.

Barbara Scholkmann, Sindelfingen/Obere Vorstadt. Eine Siedlung des hohen und späten Mittelalters. Forschungen und Berichte zur Archäologie des Mittelalters in Baden-Württemberg 3, Stuttgart 1978, bes. 94 ff.

Hufeisen kommen sekundär quasi überall hin - bei Abbrucharbeiten römischer Ruinen etc. Für den Nachweis von "römischen Hufeisen" reicht das nicht ...

Schöne Grüße!

Martin

Lieber Martin,

ganz herzlichen Dank für Deine Angaben. Mir hilft schon der Beitrag zu Neupotz weiter. Auch wenn dort nicht nachgewiesen werden kann, dass die Hufeisen zur "Alamannenbeute" gehören, sprechen gute Argumente dafür, dass es so war.

Einstweilen hoffe ich natürlich noch auf Literatur, wo römische Hufeisen aus gesichertem Fundzusammenhang publiziert sind.

Viele Grüße,

Stefan

I'm not at my desk, so I cannot offer any references, but your question is also quite a suitable one for the evidence from Britain as well.

The accepted understanding in Britain is that the Romans did not use nailed horseshoes. And there is evidence for hipposandals from a number of sites (and I believe also recorded by the Portable Antiquities Scheme). According to the evidence and typologies used in the UK, your horseshoes would date 11th-15th centuries.

However, many of us have noted that horseshoes have quite commonly been found on Roman sites, many of which were abandoned during the Roman period and not re-occupated at a later time. Unfortunately, these sites are usually in rural areas where horseshoes may have been lost during post-Medieval agricultural work. There has been no study to date that I'm aware of that has examined horseshoes found on Roman sites and their context.

This answer probably does not help you, but I would be interested in hearing your conclusions!

Dear Rob,

to be honest, I have no definite conclusions in the moment. The evidence from Britain fits perfectly to the point of view addressed by Simone Martini cited at the beginning.

But the argumentation of Sigrid Alföldy-Thomas in the paper mentioned above by Martin Schönfelder concerning the horseshoes in the "Barbarian treasure of Neupotz" seems to be sound. It indicates that the 8 horseshoes and 3 ox-shoe found together with the 'Barbarian treasure' very probably belong to it.

This spectacular hoard was found near the Rhineland-Palatine town of Neupotz at the start of the 1980s during gravel excavation from the old Rhine and belongs to the largest metal finds from Roman times in Europe. It consists of over 1,000 objects of bronze, tin, iron and silver and weighs over 1,500 pounds. It was very probably lost during the second half of the 3rd century AD, when a group of Alamanni crossed the Rhine on their way home.

http://www.museum.speyer.de/English/Who_we_are/Projects/Exhibition_Tour_Barbarian_Treasure.htm

Alföldy-Thomas argues, that 54 objects from the hoard belong to the equipment of mount and draught animals. There are practically no medieval and modern finds from the site, and no signs for a medieval road. There seems to be no reason why there should be 11 post-roman objects in the small area, in which the hoard was found.

The same applies to a find from Hagenbach, near Neupotz. There were found 345 Roman objects, many of which belong the the equipment of animals, and two horseshoes. There is no reason, why the horseshoes should not be Roman.

Both finds don't provide firm evidence for nailed horseshoes from Roman times.

A possible way, to get further is to look for horses which died with their shoes on from battlefields, mass graves et cetera.

For example, there is a battlefield from the revolt of the Batavi (69 A.D.) outside the fort of Gelduba (Krefeld-Gellep), with remains of more than 90 horses.

Christoph Reichmann, Die Bataverschlacht. In: G. Uelsberg (Hrsg.), Krieg und Frieden: Kelten – Römer – Germanen. Begleitbuch zur Ausstellung im Rheinischen LandesMuseum Bonn, 21. Juni 2007 bis 06. Januar 2008 (Darmstadt 2007) 313-315.

It would be great to get information if there were any horseshoes ...

Best regards,

Stefan

----

PS: In the last hours I found three papers, which may be relevant for the question:

- Georg Brunner, Eine Typologie von Hufnägeln als Mittel für Datierungen. Mittelalter 12 (1), 2007, 1-10.

http://dx.doi.org/10.5169/seals-166045

According to Brunner, the nail on the second horseshoe from Obermendig (as shown above) would belong to the Quadratschaft-Typ (after 9th century AD, common between 1000-1250 AD).

- Stavros Lazaris. Considerations sur l'apparition du fer à clous : contribution à l'histoire du cheval dans l'Antiquité tardive. La veterinaria antica e medievale, Oct 2007, Catania, Italy. pp. 259-291.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/49133367_Considrations_sur_l%27apparition_du_fer__clous__contribution__l%27histoire_du_cheval_dans_l%27Antiquit_tardive

https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00462110/document

- Frédéric Trément, Romanisation et développement dans les campagnes des Gaules. Dans Ouzoulias P., Tranoy L. (dir.) Comment les Gaules devinrent romaines. Colloque international (Auditorium du Louvre, 14-15 septembre 2007), pp. 159-176.

p. 167: "On signalera encore l’apparition des bousandales et du fer à cheval, ou encore le net développement de l’usage des mules et mulets pour le transport, ce qui implique des élevages d’ânes."

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237006501_Romanisation_et_dveloppement_dans_les_campagnes_des_Gaules

Article Considérations sur l'apparition du fer à clous : contributio...

Conference Paper Romanisation et développement dans les campagnes des Gaules.

In the Iberian peninsular nailed horseshoes (herradura) seem to appear in the 9th century:

El gobierno del caballo montado en la antigüedad clásica con especial referencia al caso de Iberia. Bocados, espuelas y la cuestión de la silla de montar, estribos y herraduras. Gladius XXV, 2005, pp. 97-150.

https://www.uam.es/proyectosinv/equus/Quesada%20en%20GLADIUS%20XXV%20%282005%29.pdf

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/250312491_El_gobierno_del_caballo_montado_en_la_antigedad_clsica_con_especial_referencia_al_caso_de_Iberia._Bocados_espuelas_y_la_cuestin_de_la_silla_de_montar_estribos_y_herraduras

p 143: "En cambio, las primeras herraduras datadas con seguridad, en el s. IX d.C., coinciden con las primeras representaciones claras en el arte y citas en fuentes literarias."

Best regards,

Stefan

Article El gobierno del caballo montado en la antigüedad clásica con...

Dear colleague,

You can also find some further informations in this article : « Rôle et place du cheval dans l’Antiquité tardive : Questions d’ordre économique et militaire », dans Animal and Environment in Byzantium (7th-12th c.), I. Anagnostakis, T. G. Kolias, E. Papadopoulou (éd.), Athènes, 2011, p. 245-272 (National Hellenic Research Foundation – Institute for Byzantine Research. International Symposium 21)

and also in this book : Le cheval dans les sociétés antiques et médiévales. Actes des Journées internationales d'étude (Strasbourg, 6-7 novembre 2009), Turnhout: Brepols, 2012 (Bibliothèque de l’Antiquité tardive 22).

Best regards and good luck,

Stavros

http://www.brepols.net/Pages/ShowProduct.aspx?prod_id=IS-9782503544403-1

Dear colleague,

many thanks for your paper and the link.

Best wishes,

Stefan

An old text, which denies the existence of nailed horseshoes in Roman times:

Friedrich Winkelmann, Über das Hufeisen. Germania 12 (4), 1928, 135-143.

http://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/germania/article/view/20944

http://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/germania/article/view/20944/14717

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.11588/ger.1928.20944

Best regards,

Stefan

I'm not sure that it will help you much, as it was in the 1930's and 1940's, but there was interesting [if very general] discussion of this. See for instance an article in the Classical Journal, which can be accessed at http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Journals/CJ/27/4/The_Roman_Horseshoe*.html Recent debate in Britain seems to argue that even the [very few] nailed shoes found in Roman contexts may have been intrusive finds: see, for instance, K R. Dixon and P Southern, The Roman Cavalry [publ Routledge], 2013, pp 232-233. I suppose that if more examples were excavated in firmly Roman contexts in Britain, the reasoning here would be adapted.

Dear Margaret,

many thanks for the link and the reference of the book by K. R. Dixon and P. Southern. Mrs. Hilary Cool wrote me (Email from yesterday) that at the auxiliary fort at Caersws (Wales) a horseshoe was found that seemed from its context to be undoubtedly of Roman date.

For the moment it seems to me that in Roman Britain horseshoes were at least anything but common.

Best wishes,

Stefan

Dear Stefan, 

Yes, their rarity at least is agreed! Hilary Cool's advice will, of course, be entirely reliable. As for British finds in general, it seems academically unsound, if not circular reasoning, to say that a] there are no classical references to nailed horseshoes in the  Roman world,  b] the Romans did not use nailed horseshoes, and c] any horseshoes found in ostensibly Roman contexts in Britain are therefore not Roman, but intrusive finds of later date...

Looking forward to further evidence, as at Caersws. With kind regards,

Margaret

Dear Margaret,

again thank you very much for your answer. Another possible candidate as a site with securely dated horseshoes of Roman age may be the villa of Bucknowle:

Tony Light & Peter Ellis (eds), Bucknowle, A Romano-British villa and its antecedents: Excavations 1976-1991. Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society, Monograph Series Number 18 (Dorchester 2009).

https://books.google.de/books?id=TkU-AQAAIAAJ&q=horseshoe+Romano-British&dq=horseshoe+Romano-British&hl=de&sa=X&ved=0CD8Q6AEwBGoVChMI2e6kuPrJxwIVBY4sCh0a8gH8

I was only able to extract two small sections from Google (see below), but will certainly read the book.

With kind regards,

Stefan

Stefan: being English, I know our loose use of English means that you need to be able to check details, or see a picture, when the word 'horseshoe' is used. Some writers [even in archaeological reports] may use this word interchangeably with 'hipposandal', so you may need to check references closely.

Kind regards,

Margaret

I am not specialist of this materia; but I think two persons can help.

Our specialiste in questions concerning horse shoeing in Switzerland is Dr. Urs Imhof,

CH-3210 Kerzers: [email protected]

Prof. Christoph Mülling, Leipzig, gave in 2012 a paper about history of horseshoes at the equine congress in Geneva. his E-Mail: [email protected]

Best regards

Hans Geyer

Dear Hans,

thank you very much for your tips. I find a useful paper of Urs Imhof that is online:

Urs Imhof, Die Geschichte des Hufbeschlags. Schweizer Archiv für Tierheilkunde 152 (1), 2010, 21–29.

http://www.svgvm.ch/fileadmin/svgvm/dateien/dokumente/GeschichteHufbeschlag.pdf

Best regards,

Stefan Wenzel

There is a paper dealing with horse burials of Roman times in a cementary in  the Netherlands, but no horseshoes seem to have been found:

R. C. G. M. Lauwerier &.W.A.M. Hessing, Men, horses and the Miss Blanche effect; Roman horse burials in a cemetery at Kesteren, the Netherlands. Helinium, XXXII/1-2, 1992, pp. 78-109.

However the paper gives an overview of Roman horse burials in the Northwestern provinces.

Best regards,

Stefan

This discussion is the second oldest in mankind; surely, only the chicken and egg debate is older. It's interesting that authors now have sophisticated dating methods for evaluating the evidence, yet the older essays and papers may be more interesting to read because they relied more on the authors' abilities to find evidence to back up the dates and link them to metallurgy and Roman military or cultural movements. 

It's true that some authors do not distinguish between hipposandals of various materials and more modern crescent-shaped horseshoes affixed by nails. The confusion over what actually constitutes "Roman" when one is far from Rome, or in a later era, is another disagreement. But it seems like there is some poetic justice that a muddle persists at the root of the crescent-shaped horseshoe's history, given the magical powers ascribed to it by almost every culture.

Contemporary authors and their impeccable documentation notwithstanding, I think that anyone who is truly interested in the history of horseshoes is missing the most interesting discussion ever published if s/he overlooks a patient read of the eminent British veterinarian George Fleming's "Horse shoes and horse shoeing: their origin, history, uses, and abuses". Yes, it was published a long time ago, in 1869, but it is very readable and it's online, with two entire chapters addressing the questions of how, when and if the Romans shod their horses with crescents and nails.

Fleming makes a critical point: in no place in the discussion of hoofcare of Roman horses did the ancient authors ever mention how to remove a shoe or any injuries caused by nails or by being kicked by a shod horse.

Fleming may not have had the research and testing resources available today, but he did have time to read and translate the Roman literature (or assistants to do it for him) and the logic to make his case. No one quotes him anymore but if you are interested in the subject, this is the treasure trove of horseshoe history trivia that will keep you reading on this subject and following the world's second oldest argument for the rest of your life, as I surely will do.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Fleming,_George_(DNB12)

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Horse_shoes_and_horse_shoeing:_their_origin,_history,_uses,_and_abuses/Chapter_II

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Horse_shoes_and_horse_shoeing:_their_origin,_history,_uses,_and_abuses/Chapter_III

Dear Fran,

thank you very much for your tip. I will need some time to read carefully the chapters from the book of Fleming. In any case it is a great book on the cultural history of the horse.

There are some points where I will have to go into the matter. For example I hope to find a recent discussion of the sculpture found at Vaison (château de Maraudy). From the drawing reproduced by Fleming one could conclude that the "hoofs undoubtedly exhibit traces of shoeing".

The hoofs look somewhat different in photographs reproduced in:

Pedro Vila Arias / Pedro Vila Méndez, Los origines de la herradura. El debate sigue abierto.  (p. 38: Bajorrelive de Vaison).

https://claudebourgelat.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/los-orc3adgenes-de-la-herradura-el-debate-sigue-abierto.pdf

Best wishes,

Stefan

PS: A modern description of the bas-relief of Maraudy - with tiny pictures - is to be found here:

http://www.vaison-musees.com/fiche.php?id=443

http://www.vaison-musees.com/ville.php?id_musee=5

Stefan - the Vaison depiction is discussed by Dixon and Southern's Roman Cavalry book of 2013, on p. 232. They suggest that horse trappings, horseshoes, etc, may have been more usually painted on to Roman sculptures after completion by the sculptors.

Dear Margaret,

thank you for this reference. In the legend for their fig. 83 Dixon and Southern write: "Detail from a sculptural relief from Vaison, France. The sculpture shows two horses pulling a four-wheeled car. Close inspection shows that the left fore-foot of the nearest horse appears to be shod. This is a very rare example in Roman sculpture and it cannot be taken as a conclusive proof that the Romans used nailed shoes. (Espérandieu 1907, vol. 1, no. by K.R. Dixon)."

I agree with "appears to be sod". But why "it cannot be taken as a conclusive proof that the Romans used nailed shoes"?.

On the other hand, Fleming (1869) reproduces a drawing (lowermost link given by Fran Jurga), which shows nails I don't see on the photo reproduced by Pedro Vila Arias and Pedro Vila Méndez (cited above, please find pictures below). Fleming found more nails on the drawing than there should be:

"The hoofs undoubtedly exhibit traces of shoeing in this copy, which Mr Smith, who drew it, asserts is absolutely correct. It must be confessed that the number of nails on each side exceeds those in any of the specimens of shoes we have seen of that age: there are six on each side of the fore-foot, and five in the hind, making twelve and ten nails for each hoof. But the artist, in his anxiety to demonstrate that these heavy, unwieldy creatures were so completed in their equipment, has perhaps not scrupled to add a few nails more than were really present."

Friedrich Winkelmann (Über das Hufeisen, in Germania 1928, cited above, p. 136-137) refers to the relief

"Auf römischen Bildwerken ist noch kein Hufeisen nachzuweisen gewesen. Das einzige, das dafür in Anspruch genommen wurde, ein Relief von Vaison im Museum von Avignon 5) aus dem 2.-3. Jahrh. n. Chr. das zwei Pferde oder Maultiere an einem Prachtwagen angespannt darstellt, zeigt zwar Eisenplatten unter den Hufen, aber die angeblich zu erkennenden umgenieteten Nägel, Punkte mit einem Ringe umgeben, gehören eher einem Hufschmucke an und so wird es sich auch hier um einen verzierten Hufschuh, der unten eine Eisenplatte trägt, eine solea ferrea, handeln."

He interprets the 'nails' as 'trappings of the hoofes'. It looks like that everyone who dealed with this work of art found a different interpretation.

Kind regards,

Stefan

On p 232 Dixon/Southern argue that only one hoof is shown shod and they say 'The evidence is thus inconclusive ' They do, however, imply that the other three feet may have had details painted on. On p 233 they add, 'the possibility cannot be discounted that this is an ordinary soleae ferrae tied on by cords which were painted on the monument.....' [NB 'an ordinary soleae ferrae' sic - sloppy use of English from English-speakers again, as the Latin is in the plural, but does that odd adjective 'ferrae' suggest sloppy use of Latin?]. Either way, concerning 'Roman horseshoes', everyone seems to be 'having their cake and eating it',  to mix metaphors - and use a lovely anglicism. 

Dear Margaret,

thank you for the clarification. I didn't have expected that there is such a rich history connected with horseshoes and will keep to be interested in them, especially in 'nailed horseshoes from Roman times'.

Kind regards,

Stefan

Stefan, I think that the clarity of the situation is not helped here by 1] the cautious [over-cautious?] interpretation of stratified examples and 2] us as English-speakers using 'horseshoes' and 'hipposandals' interchangeably. German is perhaps a more precise language for technicalities? We English-speakers don't always think enough before we write. I know that I, for one, am constantly having to self-edit and re-write sentences that were too sloppy to be understood accurately. The danger is then of becoming too pedantic.....

Kind regards,

Margaret

Dear Margaret,

the British Museum managed to maintain ease and clarity:

"Roman Britain, 1st-2nd century AD

From Sun Street, Bishopsgate, London

Nailed horseshoes were known but rarely used by the Romans. Much more common were iron hipposandals, a form of temporary shoe that could be fastened to the hoof for use on metalled roads and easily removed when not required. Hipposandals were probably intended for draught animals: horses, ponies or mules. Because the animal's hoof exerted great pressure, they had to be made from thick metal. The underside was often given a tread to increase the animal's grip on the surface of the road.

Like many Roman metal finds from London, this large example is in almost new condition, having been preserved in waterlogged ground."

http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/highlight_objects/pe_prb/i/iron_hipposandal.aspx

Kind regards,

Stefan

There is no evidence for horseshoes in Merovingian Northern France:

Christèle Baillif-Ducros / Jean-Hervé Yvinec, Le cheval de monte aux VIe-VIIe siècles en Gaule du nord. Croisement de données archéologiques et ostéologiques. Archéopages 41 (dossier: La place du cheval), 2015, 14-19.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282909745_Le_cheval_de_monte_aux_VIe-VIIe_sicles_en_Gaule_du_nord._Croisement_de_donnes_archologiques_et_ostologiques

p. 17:

"Le dernier élément complétant l’équipement du cheval est le fer. Suite logique de l’hipposandale (soleam ferream), la ferrure présente une différence notable avec sa devancière : elle est préventive et non thérapeutique. Pour la période mérovingienne, aucun indice de l’utilisation du fer à cheval n’a été mis en évidence par l’archéologie.

La ferrure des équidés est bien une innovation médiévale et propre au continent européen (Portet, 2005). Elle est pratiquée de manière courante vers les ixe-xe siècles, comme l’attestent les quantités de déchets liés à la clouterie retrouvés en contexte archéologique (Portet, 2005 ; Digard, 2007)."

Digard J.-P., 2007, Une histoire du cheval. Art, techniques, société, Arles, Actes Sud, 296 p.

Portet N., 2005, « L’hippiatrie médiévale, une réalité archéologique », in Mousnier M. (éd.), Les animaux malades en Europe occidentale, vie-xixe siècle, Actes des XXVes journées internationales d’histoire de l’abbaye de Flaran (12-14 septembre 2003), Flaran, Presses universitaires du Mirail, p. 11-40.

Best regards,

Stefan

Article Le cheval de monte aux VIe-VIIe siècles en Gaule du nord. Cr...

This is to add a reference to an article on the small finds and ceramics of a Roman villa near Cologne (Köln-Widdersdorf), in which a nailed horseshoe from undoubtly Roman context is described "Auch an dem römischen Ursprung der vorliegenden Stücke ist nach Ausweis des Fundzusammenhangs nicht zu zweifeln." (Liesen 2005, 446-448).

Bernd Liesen, Die Grabungen der römischen Villa von Widdersdorf. Kleinfunde und Keramik. Mit einem Beitrag von Antje Düerkop. Kölner Jahrbuch 36, 2003 (2005), 427-495.

Feature 184 of the villa, in which the horseshoe published by Liesen was found, is a ditch belonging to the south-eastern enclosure of the villa (Spiegel 2003, 703, fig. 3 and supplement). This ditch is dated to the second half of the first century A.D.

Elisabeth Maria Spiegel, Ausgrabungen in einem römischen Siedlungsplatz mit zwei spätantiken burgi in Köln-Widdersdorf. Mit Beiträgen von Bernd Liesen, Peter Noelke, Peter F. Mittag, Jörg Schalich, Hubert Berke, Jutta Meurers-Balke, Ursula Tegtmeier, Kyra van Zijderveld, Bernd Päffgen und Andreas Hauptmann. Kölner Jahrbuch 35, 2002 (2003), 699-782, 1 supplement.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265847129_Ausgrabungen_in_einem_romischen_Siedlungsplatz_mit_zwei_spatantiken_burgi_in_Koln-Widdersdorf_Mit_Beitragen_von_B_Liesen_P_Noelke_PF_Mittag_J_Schalich_H_Berke_J_Meurers-Balke_U_Tegtmeier_K_van_Zijderv

Article Ausgrabungen in einem römischen Siedlungsplatz mit zwei spät...

There is a nailed horseshoe from Walldürn on the Upper Germanic Limes kept in the Bezirksmuseum. It doesn' t appear in the ORL, next week i will look for it.

It was exposed within the former exhibition concept together with medieval pottery foundduring a superficial survey (when ? by whom ?) in the Walldürn fort and vicus area (so called Kugeltöpfe corresponding to pottery types following northern German and Dutch models, but manufactered possibly also in the Main valley).

In University classes they told us, that nailed horseshoes from Roman sites belonged to Medieval searchers of metallic objects. What do you think about this explanation ?

Dear Joachim,

if the nailed horseshoe from the fort of Walldürn was found in a Roman pit od a ditch, it would help in this discussion. I agree with your academic teachers that most nailed horseshoes from Roman sites are probably "later intrusions". But there seem to be some rare exceptions: nailed horseshoes found on Roman sites in undoubtly Roman contexts (see discussion above).

Best regards,

Stefan

Dear Stefan,

thank you very much, I agree wit you.

I would like to focus on two questions. First: In the Middle Age Iron horseshoes were widely used, or did they belong onls to the gentry ?

Second. Are there archaeometrical studies to determine the age of such kind of objects ?

Regards

Joachim

And... did horses [proper] belong only to 'the gentry'?