Horse shoes and horse shoeing: their origin, history, uses, and abuses/Chapter VI
CHAPTER VI.
Britain probably received its earliest population from Gallia Celtica some centuries before the Christian era, and these Belgiæ or Cimbri were what we now term the ancient Britons. The island, however, was in all probability populated before the arrival of these wanderers, though we know little of its history until the advent of the Romans. At Cæsar's invasion it was well populated, and the interior was inhabited by people who believed themselves to be autochthones. The southern and eastern coasts were more particularly occupied by the emigrants from Belgic Gaul, who had crossed the channel and the northern sea, attracted by the prospect of plunder. After having obtained a footing they became agriculturists. They possessed the same manners as the Gauls, though their social condition was less advanced; the Celts in Gaul having attained a comparatively high degree of civilization. They were also more fierce than their kindred on the other side of the channel, and were altogether, perhaps, in a more degraded condition than those tribes we have been considering. Their religion was the same as that of the Gauls, and Tacitus tells us that they had the same worship and the same superstitions.[1] Druidism found a congenial home in Britain when banished from the continent, though it had existed in this country, in all
likelihood, from the landing of the nomads; and with its mysterious and dismal rites, it no doubt claimed the same amount of metallurgic skill that it secretly practised at Alesia and elsewhere.
Fierce and undaunted in battle, the ancient Britons were also a horse-loving people, and largely employed horses in peace, as well as in war. They appear to have been passionately fond of horses, as the fragments of their poetry that have reached us abundantly testify: and it would almost appear that all their fighting men were mounted on spirited steeds.[2] Whether ridden by their fearless masters, or harnessed to the multitudes of chariots so conspicuous in their armies, the little hardy British steeds appear to have been well trained. Cæsar's first impression of them was anything but favourable to the expected success of the Roman arms. When attempting to land upon our coast, he thus describes them: 'The barbarians (as was then the fashion to designate our valiant woad-stained forefathers), upon perceiving the design of the Romans, sent forward their cavalry and charioteers (essedarii), a class of warriors of whom it is their practice to make great use in their battles; and following with the rest of their forces, endeavoured to prevent our men landing. In this was the greatest difficulty, for the following reasons, namely, because our ships, on account of their great size, could be stationed only in deep water; and our soldiers, in places unknown to them, with their hands embarrassed, oppressed with a large and heavy weight of armour, had at the same time to leap from the ships, stand amid the waves, and encounter the enemy; whereas they, either on dry ground, or advancing a little way into the water, free in all their limbs, in places thoroughly known to them, could confidently throw their weapons, and spur on their horses, which were accustomed to this kind of service. Dismayed by these circumstances, and altogether untrained in this mode of battle, our men did not all exert the same vigour and eagerness which they had been wont to exert in engagements on dry ground. . . . . But the enemy, who were acquainted with all the shallows, when from the shore they saw any coming from a ship one by one, spurred on their horses, and attacked them while embarrassed; many surrounded a few, others threw their weapons upon our collected forces on their exposed flank!'[3]
Their cavalry and chariots often awed the valorous Romans, and frequently defeated them. They used the 'Essedum,' or war-chariot, much as the Greeks did in the heroic ages; but this chariot was more ponderous than that of the Greeks, and opened before instead of behind. The wheels were armed with scythes, and the pole was wide and strong, so that the warrior was able, whenever he liked, to run along its top, and even to raise himself upon the yoke, then retreat with the greatest speed into the body of the car, which was driven with extraordinary swiftness and skill. Contrary to the custom with the Greeks, the drivers ranked above their fighting companions. These chariots were much esteemed by the Britons, and were made purposely as noisy as possible, so that by creaking and clanging of wheels they might strike dismay.
‘Their mode of fighting with their chariots is this: firstly, they drive about in all directions, and throw their weapons, and generally break the ranks of the enemy with the very dread of their horses and the noise of their wheels; and when they have worked themselves in between the troops of horse, leap from their chariots and engage on foot. The charioteers in the mean time withdraw some little distance from the battle, and so place themselves with the chariots that, if their masters are overpowered by the number of the enemy, they may have a ready retreat to their own troops. Thus they display in battle the speed of horse, together with the firmness of infantry; and by daily practice and exercise attain to such expertness that they are accustomed, even on a declining and steep place, to check their horses at full speed, and manage and turn them in an instant and run along the pole, and stand on the yoke, and thence betake themselves with the greatest celerity to their chariots again.’[4] Thus they filled the middle of the field of battle with their tumult and wheeling and careering. The Britons appear to have been the only people in Europe who fought from chariots, a circumstance which affords the early British historian, Geoffrey of Monmouth, an argument to prove that they were of Trojan origin.
The immense number of horses they possessed may be judged from the fact, that Cassivelaunus, the British chief who was invested with the supreme command of the forces of the island, in order to oppose Caesar, after dismissing all his other troops, yet retained no fewer than 4000 war chariots about him. And their cavalry was not to be despised. ‘The mode of fighting on horseback threatened equal danger to those who gave way, or those who pursued. They never engaged in close order, but in small parties, and with great intervals, and had detachments placed in different parts, and then the one relieved the other, and the vigorous and fresh succeeded the wearisome.’ ‘The horses and charioteers of the enemy contended vigorously in a skirmish with our cavalry on the march; yet so that our men were conquerors in all parts, and drove them to their woods and hills.’[5] Nothing but the superior organization of the Romans, and the ability of their generals, prevented their being defeated by this equestrian people.
That the Celts in Britain were well acquainted with iron, and placed a high value on it, we learn from Herodian. He says: ‘They know not the use of clothing, but encircle their loins and necks with iron; deeming this an ornament and an evidence of opulence, in like manner as other barbarians esteem gold. But they puncture their skins with pictured forms of every sort of animals; on which account they wear no clothing, lest they should hide the figures on their bodies. They are a most warlike and sanguinary race, carrying only a small shield and a spear, and a sword girded to their naked bodies. Of a breast-plate or helmet they know not the use, esteeming them an impediment to their progress through the marshes.’
A very old Welsh poem, ‘Gorchan Cynfelin,’ says, in regard to Druid sacrifices: ‘When I was devoted to the sacrificial flames, they ransomed me with gold, iron, and steel.
The Britons made swords and other weapons of iron; their chariot-wheels were shod with iron, and these wheels are, perhaps, the most characteristic memorials of this ancient race. Their remains have been discovered not only in France, but in many English barrows, with iron snaffles for horses' bridles. York Museum contains a good specimen of both. The impressions upon the coins of Cunobelin and others testify that they were proficients in the construction of carriages and wheels.
Archæological researches, so far as they refer to the subject of horse-shoes, have been much less successful in this country than in France. From what we have just noticed of the dexterity of these Celtic horsemen and charioteers, and of the manner in which they used the horse, it is scarcely possible to believe that the hoofs of that animal could have been unshod. The daily practice of their warlike manœuvres, particularly in our climate, must have entailed an amount of strain and wear upon the feet which they could not have withstood, unless protected in some substantial manner; and as the art of shoeing with iron plates and nails was, as there appears to be abundance of archæological evidence to prove, practised by the same race in Gaul at this period, it can hardly be doubted that such was also the case in Britain. The discoveries of iron shoes, however, have here been comparatively few and. far between, though for what reason it would be difficult to say; but perhaps the little attention given to such an apparently trifling matter may be the cause. Sufficient evidence has been collected, however, to prove that shoes were in use at a very early age, and if not before the Roman invasion, at least during the Roman occupation of Britain; and that now about to be offered will, it is anticipated, effectually dispose of the assertion made by Dr Pegge, Sir F. Meyrick, Bracy Clark, Youatt, and many other writers, that the art of shoeing was first introduced into England by the Normans. It may also tend to correct the equally erroneous opinion enunciated by some of these and other authorities, to the effect that the Goths and Vandals who overthrew the Roman empire were the first to make this practice of arming the hoofs known to the western world. The Goths and Vandals at any rate did not reach Britain, and although the proofs that shoeing was known before their arrival in Italy and Gaul are strong enough, the testimony is still more decisive as to the employment of iron hoof-plates in this country at an earlier period than that invasion. Neither have any Tartar hordes ever crossed the sea to deposit the shoes of their steeds in our soil, as on the continent of Europe.
Some good specimens of the pattern we have referred to as being Celtic and Gallo-Celtic, have been found in situations and under circumstances which lead us to the conclusion that they also belong to that epoch, and were manufactured by kindred hands.
Sir Richard C. Hoare found the halves of two horse-shoes in a British barrow,[6]but as they are not described or figured, so far as I am aware, nothing can be said as to their characteristics. This authority was of opinion, however, that few, if any, interments in barrows took place after the Roman invasion in Britain; so that these articles must have been in use before or soon after that event. He also discovered an urn in a barrow, with an ornament on the rim in relief like the shape of a horseshoe.[7]
The able veterinary surgeon, Bracy Clark, in 1832, described what he termed 'two ancient horse-shoes,' found near Silbury Hill, Wiltshire. This hill, which is situated on the road from London to Bath, is nothing more than a mound of large size, and is believed to be of great antiquity; by some it has even been supposed to be the appendage of a Druidical temple, it being placed exactly due south, and possessing other characters of a similar kind. It is to be much regretted that no methodical and careful examination has yet been made of this tumulus, for at various times objects of great age and antiquarian value have been obtained from it. An opening was made in it in 1723, when a human skeleton, the antlers of a deer, a knife with a horn handle, and a horse's iron bit were found. Stukely thought the hill was the grave of a great king, and that these were his remains. 'In the month of March, 1723, Mr Holford ordered some trees to be planted on this hill, in the middle of the area at the top, which is 60 cubits (103 feet 9 inches) in diameter. The workmen dug up the body
neither is any notice of them to be found in his Guide to the Wiltshire Barrows. of the great king there buried in the centre, very little below the surface; the bones were extremely rotten, so that they crumbled them in pieces with their fingers. The soil was altogether chalk, dug from the side of the hill below, of which the whole barrow is made. Six weeks after, I came to rescue a curiosity which they took up there, an iron chain, as they called it, which I bought of John Fowler, one of the workmen: it was the bridle buried with the monarch, being only a solid body of rust. I immersed it in a limner's drying cloth, and dried it carefully, keeping it ever since very dry. It is now as fair and entire as when the workmen took it up. There were deer's horns, an iron knife with a bone handle, too, all excessively rotten, taken up along with it.'[8] Bracy Clark described the bit in his 'Treatise on Bits.'
Hoare asserts that the majority of the Wiltshire barrows, of which this Silbury Hill was undoubtedly one, were the sepulchral memorials of the Celtic and first colonists of Britain; and some may be ascribed to the subsequent colony of Belgæ who invaded the island. Roberts[9] plainly indicates that this immense cairn must have been erected before the arrival of the Romans; for the Roman road which traverses this county, and which passes in a tolerably direct line, when it reaches the mound turns out of its course to avoid it, and in doing so cuts through a large barrow in its vicinity, part of which is yet standing between the avenue and the hill. It was in the vicinity of this mound that these shoes were met with. The person who presented them to Mr Clark, says of the first shoe (fig. 80) that it was found upon the down on the opposite side of the road, at the distance of nearly half-a-mile from the place where the other shoe was found, under a heap of flints.
 |
| fig. 80 |
These flints, it is probable, were taken at some former period from the above spot, and were deposited upon the down, probably for mending the roads; for, from the perfect accordance and similarity of both these shoes, in their peculiar make and fashion, says Bracy Clark, and from other circumstances, there can be no reasonable doubt of their having been constructed at the same period, and in all probability belonged to the same animal, the one being a hind, and the other a fore shoe, and of nearly the same size. They had also perfectly similar nails. Being looked upon by the labourers who removed the flints as mere old iron, they were passed unnoticed by them, as they sometimes found in these localities Roman and other coins of some value.
 |
| fig. 81 |
Of the second shoe (fig. 81), he says it was found 'by the levelling of a bank, in Silbury Hill mead, for the purpose of watering it. The soil removed on this occasion was principally chalk, to the depth of a foot or two.' No mention is made of bones of horses, or other articles, being found with it, but the skeleton of a man was found at some little distance.
Mr Clark, who was somewhat of an enthusiast in the matter of shoes and shoeing, and appears to have lost no opportunity of examining old specimens, though he previously believed that this art was only introduced into Britain by the Normans, confesses these Silbury shoes to have been the oldest he ever saw or heard of, and appears to have been rather puzzled by them. In all likelihood, as he remarks, the animal to which they belonged had been buried with them, since the nails were present in them, as in many of the Gallic specimens, with the clenches quite perfect and in their flexed state, which would not have been possible had the shoe been torn off while the horse was alive. This veterinarian acknowledges the shoes as truly exhibiting an early period in the history of the art. 'Their mould or general form is neither broad nor heavy, as in the oldest French shoes we have ever seen, but they are rather what would be called a light shoe. In their upper surface (foot surface), flat, a little concaved, however, inwards, and at the inflections perfectly flat. The under surface of the shoe is rounded a little and convex, or rising in the middle, having in each of the quarters three immense deep oval or oblong stampholes or countersinks, as mechanics would call them, not very near to the outer rim of the shoe, and perforated through in the middle of these cavities, with three large, almost square, perforations; the size of these, which time and oxydation may perhaps have a little enlarged, gave abundant opportunity for the early artisan to direct his nail as much obliquely outwards as he wished, which a more confined aperture, or greater thickness of metal, would not have allowed him so readily to do. Now these stamp-pits must have been done with a very rough, clumsy tool, for the rim or outer margin of the shoe has been terribly disturbed by it, and thrown out into bulges of a surprising size, disfiguring the shoe very much, and also endangering the horse's legs. The heels of the shoes are provided with very prominent calkins, made by doubling or turning over the iron, and lapping and welding it; finding, no doubt, the great advantages which attended this plan. The wearing line of the shoe at the toe in No. 1 (fig. 80) was considerably worn away, but in No. 2 (fig. 81) hardly so much. These shoes, generally speaking, are thickest forwards, and go declining in thickness till reaching the calkins. Their insides are thicker than the outside. The nail-heads are very remarkable for their size, and projecting high from the shoes; and that part of the head next the aperture in the shoe is formed with a very abrupt broad shoulder, and nearly straight, but a little inclining, however, towards the shank. The sides of the head of the nail are nearly straight and perpendicular, forming an obtuse angle to the former line; upwards it passes by another converging line towards the summit, or top of the nail, which is made flat, and is of the length of about a quarter of an inch, for receiving the blows of the hammer; the head itself stands beyond the shoe, and if embraced by the finger is flat, and shows a thickness of only about, or perhaps less than, the eighth of an inch. The shank of the nail is short, compared with modern nails, and is square, tapering all the way to the point, but is made rather flatter and broader on one side, viz., that side which corresponds to the flatness of the head.'
The nails were not pointed, as now-a-days; and appear to have been driven only a short distance in the hoof, and the end that had passed through was bent round and lay close to the side of the foot for safety. The sharp point was not wrung off, as is now the custom, but passing along the face of the hoof, was turned round like a carpenter's nail, and probably buried slightly in the crust, to give it a hold. 'The excellent preservation in which these shoes are found can only be accounted for by their having been for a long time defended, perhaps, by the hoofs to which they were attached, and secondarily, from their being deposited among flints and chalk, the most indestructible and undecomposable materials of all the earthy substances.'
These relics are certainly extremely crude attempts in workmanship, and betray a very primitive period—the very infancy of the art,—more so, indeed, than any specimens that have yet been met with. Some time after they were discovered, the late Dean of Hereford obtained a horse-shoe similar in form, which had been found with others, and a skeleton, a short distance north-west of Silbury Hill. This was figured in the Transactions of the Salisbury Institute.
Two specimens of similar construction, and which were found at Beckhampton, are now in the Museum at Cirencester, Gloucestershire. One of them (fig. 82) is much more primitive-looking than the other, and is of smaller size, agreeing very closely in this respect with those described and figured by Bracy Clark. The over calkins are particularly conspicuous. The other (fig. 83) is of larger size and more circular in shape, and shows a nail-head worn down to the surface of the shoe.
|
|
| fig. 82 | fig. 83 |
Beckhampton, we must remember, is near the Druidical circle or temple of Abury, the western avenue of that structure extending towards this village; and that the stupendous mound of Silbury is within the plan of Abury, and may have been a component part of the temple. It is somewhat remarkable that this portion of Wiltshire, so famous for its ancient British monuments, should furnish such a number of these primitive horse-shoes.
Three-fourths of a shoe, in excellent preservation, and evidently of the same period, was found at Springhead, near Gravesend, Kent, some years ago, and is now in the possession of Mr Sylvester of that place. It was found imbedded in compact chalk, and, from its appearance, has been scarcely worn; it had broken through at one of the nail-holes soon after being fastened on the hoof. From the situation of this relic, and the accompanying remains, there can scarcely be a doubt as to its belonging to the Roman, or even pre-Roman, period. Its length is 4⅛ inches; width, 3¾ inches; breadth at toe, ⅝ths of an inch; and at heel, ½ inch. The plate is thin; at the toe, where it is strongest, it is scarcely ¼th inch. The iron is of excellent quality; and the calkin, which is formed by doubling over the end of the branch, projects about ¼th inch above the ground surface of the shoe (fig. 84).
 |
| fig. 84 |
The nail-holes, three of which are yet intact, have been three on each side, and of the usual form. A small lump of rust indicates the remains of a nail-head filling up the middle hole of one branch. The border of the shoe, particularly the external one, is markedly undulating, owing to the large size of the cavity made to contain a portion of the nailhead. This cavity is ¾fths of an inch long, and ⅜ths wide; and the hole for the reception of the nail-shank is nearly circular, and has a diameter of ¼th inch: certainly the nails must have been very thick for the small hoofs shoes of this kind would fit. The weight of this excellent specimen is 3 ounces 7 drachms; so that the entire shoe may be calculated to have weighed about 5 ounces. There are no retaining clips, and the ground and hoof surfaces are flat and rough, as if carelessly and scantily hammered. Springhead, where this antique scrap was found, stands near the Roman Watling Street; and from the soil in its vicinity, which is chalky, great numbers of coins—many fibulæ, some fictilia, etc. — belonging to various periods in the early history of our country, but particularly the Roman, have been picked up during a number of years. The coins are chiefly brasses, some of them very old. Only one gold coin has been discovered — that of the Roman Emperor Valentine. The three, specimens next exhibited (figs. 85, 86, 87)
fig. 85
|
|
| fig. 86 | fig. 87 |
are from the York Museum, and were found a few years ago under a cobble-road, near the bridge which crosses the foss of that city, at a depth of eight feet below the surface. A number of these shoes were discovered in this situation ; and it has been conjectured by some one that very long ago there may have been a ford at this place, and that these articles were then lost in the clay by horses in crossing. They are evidently Celtic, or Romano-Celtic, if we compare them with those from the graves in Gaul. Of the three represented, figure 86 is apparently the oldest; next, figure 85; and lastly, figure 87. All have been worn; all have the irregularly undulating border, the peculiar groove, nail-holes, and calkins, and the characteristic nail-heads. Figure 85 is a comparatively large shoe, and figure 87 a small one. They are very thin, and do not exceed ¼th of an inch in thickness. The nails in 85 and 86 have the points turned in a similar manner to those of Silbury Hill; and figure 87 alone appears to have been wrenched off while the horse that wore it was alive. The stalks or bodies of the nails are shorter and more square than we now use them, and the heads are of the semicircular T pattern. The calkins stand about ¼th of an inch higher than the shoe.[10]
It may be observed, that in the same museum are the remains of a chariot, and the bones of a man, horse, and pig, which were collected in a barrow not far from York; but I cannot ascertain that any shoes were found. With specimens of Romano-Celtic shoes—that is, of shoes of this pattern found associated with Roman remains—we are more liberally furnished; for it must be confessed that those which we might at a hazard term 'pre-Roman' are extremely scarce.
At Colney, in Norfolk, were discovered Roman urns, iron spear-heads, and ' a horse-shoe of unusual shape '—round and broad in front, narrowing very much backwards, and having its extreme ends brought almost close behind, and rather pointed inwards, with the nail-holes still perfect.'[11] No drawing accompanies this description.
In making a deep excavation at Lothbury, London, in 1847, at a depth of 16 feet below the surface, the workmen came upon a number of Roman reliquiæ, consisting of iron keys, Samien and other pottery, and various other articles, amongst which was an iron horse-shoe (fig. 88).
 |
| fig. 88 |
It is of the usual fashion of that epoch, is only three inches six-eighths long, three inches five-eighths wide, and about three-quarters of an inch at the broadest part of the toe. It narrows very much towards the heels, and there are but faint traces of calkins. The one branch is a little longer than the other, and altogether the specimen is thin and light. The peculiar shape of this horse-shoe, the depth at which it was discovered, and its being mingled with undoubted Roman remains, proves that it must be of high antiquity, pointing to the Roman-British period as the age of its fabrication.[12] Another shoe of the same character was found in Moorfields, in the line of the old London Wall, some years ago. It is about 4¼ inches long, has the six oval cavities, and calkins rolled-over and welded (fig. 89).
 |
| fig. 89 |
In the British Museum there is also a specimen, procured while making a sewer in 1833, in Fenchurch Street, London. Fragments of Roman pottery, boars' teeth, and other articles, were found with it. It is thin and light, has the nail-holes of the characteristic number and shape; narrows a little towards the heels, where there are calkins, and shows marks of wear. It measures four and three eighths inches long, and four inches wide. It is narrower across the toe than several of the others examined, and resembles somewhat the third York specimen (fig. 90).
 |
| fig. 8 |
In August, 1854, there was discovered at Gloucester, at the depth of some nine or ten feet from the surface, and mingled with numerous fragments of Roman fictilia, the outer half of a strong iron horse-shoe, with one of the large fiat-headed nails already described remaining in one of the three holes. It is exactly similar, in size and make, to the last-mentioned shoe.
Another shoe precisely like it, but of rather larger dimensions, was met with beneath a Roman road at Inneravon, Linlithgowshire, Scotland, when the old pavement was being removed to prepare the ground for macadamizing. This shoe is in the possession of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland.[13]
Gloucestershire, indeed, has long been famous for the Roman and other ancient remains discovered in it from time to time. The town of Gloucester boasts of a high antiquity, it being the Caer Glowe or Glev of the Celts, the termination -um being afterwards added, euphoniæ gratia, to form the Glevum, the name by which the Romans designated this large colonial city; subsequently it was the Gleow-ceaster of the Saxons. Its importance to the ancient Britons and Romans may have been owing not only to its situation on the banks of the Severn, but also to its proximity to the great iron district of the Forest of Dean. It is not to be wondered at, then, that some of the finest specimens of farriery I have been able to inspect should be discovered in this county. Some years ago, when laying down sewers in the town of Gloucester, many relics of antiquity were disinterred in the excavations. In Northgate Street, at a depth of eight or ten feet below the present level, which is also the usual depth at which all other Roman remains, such as tesselated pavements and the like, are found, and some seven or eight inches below the pitched Roman road (via strata), were found a number of horse-shoes and other articles of the Roman period. Two of the shoes I have had the
opportunity of inspecting, and they correspond in every particular with those already described as belonging to  |
| fig. 91 |
this period. One of them (fig. 91) is the most perfect specimen I ever saw, and is so little affected by its long sojourn underground, that but for the fact of its having been found with fibulæ, a lamp (lucerna), and other characteristic memorials of the Roman æra, together with its peculiar form, one would be perfectly justified in asserting it had quite recently come from the anvil of the blacksmith. It has never been worn, a circumstance to which its high preservation is partly due; the edges are perfectly clean and sharp, and every stage in its manufacture can be readily traced, as there is not the smallest speck of rust upon it. The iron of which it is composed is of the very purest description, and so white and ductile, that it was at first conjectured to be silver. This, however, has been ascertained to be owing to the presence of a somewhat large proportion of nickel,[14] which has most largely contributed to the exemption from oxidation. I am informed that iron of this character, with much nickel in it, is found on the surface of the ground in Wilts. The outside of the shoe is black, as all iron work is when just from the hammer. The specimen weighs only 41/4 ounces, and is 41/4 inches long, and 37/8 inches wide. The calkins are rolled-over in the usual way; the immense oval depressions for the nail-heads are stamped nearly through the substance of the shoe, and have been made by a blunt tool when the iron was very hot. There is nothing to indicate that the shoe had ever been placed on the bick or beak-horn of an anvil to give it its shape. The round holes pierced for the passage of the nails appear to have been punched through when the iron was in a cold state, as the round holes in the horse-shoes are made at the present day in Syria, Turkey, and the East generally. These apertures are only six in number, and there is no indication of attempts at raising a toe-clip. Both surfaces of the shoe are plane, and the workmanship is not of a very high order, but appears to have been executed in a hurried manner.
The other shoe I examined had been found a short distance from it. It is very perfect, though slightly worn (it had been on the left fore foot), is precisely similar in figure, size, and other particulars, and is made of excellent iron. Accompanying these two shoes was a most interesting specimen [15] found on the surface of the ground, on a high hill, one of the Cotswolds, which has been recently ploughed up by permission of the owner, who on that occasion discovered this shoe. The hill is in the parish of Haresfield, and is known as Broadborough Green, or Ringhill; and the spot where it was found is by the side of the ancient trackway, leading through the British to the Roman camp, the remains of which are still discernible. Being so near the surface of the soil, which is there very thin, and overlying the rock, the iron is very much corroded, but the form of the shoe, which is identical with the other two, is perfect. It is narrower, longer, and heavier than the two specimens just described, and the three nail-heads of one side are yet in the shoe. They project nearly as high as the calkins, and are of the shape always observed with these shoes. Its small size, and staple-like form, caused it to be designated a 'mule shoe.'
A very interesting discovery of a Roman villa has been recently made at Chedworth, a place on the great Foss Road, sixteen miles from Gloucester. With a very fine tesselated pavement, have been found a great number of articles, such as a silver spoon; two silver coins, on the obverse of which are the words 'Imperator Cæsar Antoninus Augustus;' a coin of Heliogabalus, and another of Valens; bronze fibulæ; rings; implements; bone hair-pins; bronze coins of Constantia, Constantinus, Urbs Roma, &c.; nails, armlets, twisted chains with swivels; styles, and steelyards with lead weights; iron implements, knives, chisels, spear-heads, crooks to suspend a kettle, and three pigs of iron. The presence of the latter articles would tend to show that they had been manufactured on the spot. There were also various kinds of pottery; bones of the horse, ox, sheep, and pig, and antlers of a large herd of deer, as well as two fragments of human skulls. There are proofs that the villa has been destroyed by fire, and 275 coins, mostly Roman, fix the date; no Saxon coins have been discovered, and Mr Roach Smith informs me that the relics are entirely Roman. It would appear, from various evidences, that the villa had been built or repaired after the time of Constantine the Great, and an inscription 'Prasatia' leads to the surmise that it belonged to the husband of Boadicea.
But the most important feature in this discovery is connected with our present subject: the recovery of one whole shoe and several fragments, which are said to have been with the other remains. But not one of these shows the outline we have hitherto been studying, and which has, with a few exceptions, so far as I have been able to learn, been characteristic of the shoes found with Roman or supposed pre-Roman objects. On the contrary, all exhibit what we would consider evidences of more recent manufacture. We no longer have the undulating border, the long and wide oval depressions, the narrow cover, the rolled calkins, and the large semicircular nail-heads. The nails and nail-holes are very like those now in use; the latter are stamped close to the margin of the shoe, the nails have been driven through the hoof, and the points twisted off and clinched in the usual way. The workmanship is entirely different to that we have been considering, and is much more advanced. One perfect specimen (fig. 92) measures 35/8 inches long and 4 inches wide, an imperfect one (fig. 93) 41/4 inches long and the same in width, while another half-shoe (fig. 94) is 45/8 inches long, and must have been equally wide. The breadth of it is extraordinary, measuring no less than 13/4 inch, and the shoe when complete must have nearly covered the whole of the horse's sole; it shows four holes, two of which are occupied by the remains of nails.
The only peculiarity I can discern between this and the shoes of a much later age, is the curious attempt at a calkin, which is here formed by the iron having been drawn to a point and bent forward on the ground face of the shoe. This specimen is extremely clumsy and heavy, and quite unlike the light, and we might almost say elegant, shoe hitherto found.
Figures 95 and 96 are similar to 92.
It is impossible to account for the presence of these unusual specimens with Roman remains. Mr Roach Smith informs me that the discovery of the villa was, of course, accidental, and the excavations were not carefully conducted by any one likely to note the position of the articles found. If such be the fact, there is a probability that these shoes may have belonged to a much later date than the other relics discovered, and which they in all likelihood overlaid.
It is necessary to mention, however, that at Cirencester (the Roman Corinium, the Corimon of Ptolemy, and the Duro-Cornovium of the Antonine itinerary) various important Roman remains have been found, such as altars, querns, coins of all dates, from Claudius (A.D. 42) to Valentinian (A.D. 424), Samian and common pottery, bronze fiblæe, articles of bone, ivory, and glass, and great numbers of iron nails. Many of the latter have the peculiar head of the Roman horse-shoe nail, and others have the modern head fitted for the stamped and fullered shoe.
In the museum of this town are several shoes, two or three of which closely resemble those found at Chedworth, but none of the undulating-border type. These are said to have been found with the Roman remains, but there appears to hang some doubts as to the truth of this.[16]
The ruins of Pevensey Castle, in Sussex, furnishes us with another example of the early type. This castle, one of the most remarkable in the country, has been garrisoned and fortified by the Romans, Saxons, and Normans—the ruins of each occupier telling such a tale of 'mutability' as one spot has seldom told; but, as is nearly always the case, the Roman has left his mark indelibly fixed on those walls and towers that at one time stood proudly above the low shore, when the sea almost washed their base. The Roman Castrum has an area of seven acres, but the irregular form of the walls would indicate that here was a British stronghold before the arrival of the Romans. The shoe found within these ruins, and which is now in the museum of Lewes Castle, Sussex, is larger than the specimens we have yet examined, being 4½ inches long and 4¼ wide. It does not appear to have been much worn, and yet its thickness does not exceed ⅓ of an inch; it has no calkins, and both surfaces are flat. The border is undulating, and the nail-cavities and holes are like those of the Gloucester shoes. The workmanship is good, and the nail-holes, six in number, well placed (fig. 97).
 |
| fig. 97 |
A horse-shoe has been discovered within the interesting Roman encampment on Hod Hill, Dorsetshire. This camp appears to have been a Celtic fastness made subservient to the Roman system of castrametation, and was made a great military post by the Romans. In it weapons, implements, and personal ornaments have been found in considerable numbers, all manifesting an extraordinary predominance of iron over bronze. One of the iron manufactories or smelting-places was discovered near this camp, and from evidences attending the discovery, it was established probably as early as the reign of Claudius. From the coins found in this camp, and which range from ancient British, through Augustus, Agrippa, Tiberius, Germanicus, Nero and Drusus, Caligula and Claudius, up to Trajan, as well as from other testimony, Mr R. Smith is led to assert, that not the 'slightest evidence has been afforded of the tenure of the camp at any period after the Roman occupation of Britain.'[17] In iron, there have been discovered numerous varieties of spear-heads, arrow-heads, swords, the cheek-piece of a helmet, knives, agricultural implements in great variety, bridle-bits, chains, and keys.
To the courtesy of Mr Durden, of Blandford, who possesses this, and very many of the other Roman antiquities found in the castra, I am indebted for an inspection of the interesting shoe (fig. 98).
 |
| fig. 98 |
That gentleman writes to me as follows: 'It was found within the Roman castra on Hod Hill, about three miles from Blandford, associated with many domestic articles of Roman manufacture. The coins hitherto found there belong to the first century, and it is presumed the shoe belongs to the same period.' Less primitive-looking than some of our other specimens, especially those from Springhead and Silbury Hill, it yet belongs to the same type. Its width is 3¾ inches, length 4⅛-inches, and its breadth is a little more than that of the Springhead example. Though much oxidized, it yet retains the undulated border, and it is perforated by seven nail-holes of very large size, with the oblong socket to lodge the nail-head. Three of the holes are on each side, and one in the centre of the toe has doubtless been intended to act like the modern toe-clip, and prevent the shoe from being driven back. This feature in these antique shoes is very rare, indeed this is the only instance in which I have been able to trace it. The aperture for the shank of the nail, instead of being nearly circular, as in the Springhead shoe, is quadrilateral, and of immense size, in proportion to the shoe (3/8 ths long, by 3/16 ths wide). One of the nails yet remains in the shoe, but the head is much worn; though sufficient is left to prove that it was of the flattened, high, and wide T pattern. The shank is almost square like a carpenter's nail, and fills the hole; and at a distance of only 1/4 inch from the foot surface of the shoe it bends suddenly forward as if to form a clench on the outside of the hoof. The excessive thickness of the nail, and the very short hold it had of the hoof, are easily accounted for. The shoe has evidently been for the near (left) fore foot, and the inner branch towards the heel is narrower than the outer one; it shows faint traces of a calkin, but the outer heel has a well-defined calkin formed by doubling over the extremity, as in the other specimens of this period, though this has been more clumsily done than in some of those we have noticed. The foot-surface is slightly concave from the outer to the inner rim.
In the large collection of undoubted Roman remains brought to light in this castra, are three spurs of antique shape, two of iron (figs. 99, 100), and one of bronze (fig. 101).
|
|
|
| fig. 99 | fig. 100 | fig. 101 |
'Had they been found unaccompanied by objects so exclusively Roman,' remarks Mr Roach Smith, 'they would, and with reason, have been called Norman or late Saxon.' These spurs are remarkable for their short neck or 'prick,' which is even less than the Anglo-Saxon specimens, and much more so than those of a later date. C. Caylus[18] figures an ancient bronze spur with apertures at the ends of the branches to fasten it on, like those represented in this bronze relic from Hod Hill.
At Shefford, in Bedfordshire, what was called a hoofpick was encountered with Roman relics: 'Of Roman relics no place in Bedfordshire has furnished the quantity or quality equal to Shefford. About four dozen Samian cups, dishes, and pateræ of various shapes and patterns have been there discovered, and at Stanford Bury, in its immediate vicinity. A vast variety of other reliquiæ were found with these; some splendid articles in glass, a beautiful radiated amber-coloured vase, quite perfect; a splendid blue jug, or simpulum, of elegant form, and the sacred knife that accompanies the simpulum on the reverses of coins of Antoninus and other emperors, as emblems of the rial and pontifical dignity. A few yards from hence was dug up the bones of a horse, and the ashes of his rider, together with an iron implement, evidently formed to pick the horse's hoofs, and fasten his shoes. With these were found a small silver musical instrument, a denarius of Septimus Geta, representing him at the age of nine or ten years; another also of Geta was found near, apparently two or three years older; these coins were of fine workmanship and in beautiful condition."[19]
We may be allowed to entertain doubts as to the article named being a hoof-pick; such an instrument would scarcely be necessary, if at all, with such narrow shoes, which had no concavity between them and the sole, as at a later period.
At Uriconium or Viroconium, now Wroxeter, in Shropshire, and which was one of the largest and most important Roman towns before its destruction in the middle of the fifth century, a fragment of a small horse-shoe has been gathered, but it is so oxidized and imperfect that none of its details can be made out. It is now in the Shrewsbury Museum.
A horse-shoe, supposed to be Roman, has been found at the ancient Conderum, Northumberlandshire. There is a drawing given of it in the Archæologia Æliana (vol. vi. p. 3), but no particulars as to its discovery or its dimensions. It resembles somewhat, if one can judge from the figure, those in the Cirencester Museum and at Chedworth, the cover of the shoe being wide, the borders even, and the foot-surface concave.
In the Rolfe collection of the Liverpool Museum is a shoe four inches long and the same in width, which evidently belongs to the era of undulating borders, small calkins, and nail-holes with deep sockets (fig. 102). Unfortunately there is no history attached to it. |
| fig. 102 |
This is all the evidence, so far as I can discover, which we may bring forward in favour of shoeing being in vogue in Celtic, or pre-Roman, and Roman times in this country. The wide extent over which the remains of hoof-armature has been traced, the relics, in the majority of cases, accompanying them, and the singular uniformity in size and character of most of the specimens, can scarcely leave a doubt as to the fact of shoeing being known at that early stage in our national history.
The ancient Britons were, to a large extent, driven out of England by the Anglo-Saxons, and either fled to the continent of Europe, where they gave their name to Brittany, or retired to Wales (A.D. 447)—the Britannia Secunda of the Romans—where, amid their inaccessible mountains, they defied their treacherous invaders, and for many centuries retained their peculiar customs and laws. The fact of the former may be inferred from the traces of the Cromlech, the sacrificing-stone, and the Druid-circle; while from the latter, part of which may have existed long ages before, but were revised by Howel Dha, or the Good, on the banks of the Tav, in A.D. 911, we have written evidence to prove that this handicraft was not only known and practised, but that they who followed it were privileged individuals, holding somewhat high rank at Court, and treated as if their art was one of great value.
That remarkable method of division or enumeration of the ancient Celtic nations, the trinal system, had divided Wales, between the years 843 and 876, into three dynasties,—North, South, and Powysland; and it is in the code of laws applicable to each of these, that we discover the link in the chain of evidence required to bring our history into harmony with the relics just described. These laws altogether show a very advanced agrarian condition, and much beyond that of any other nation at this period. In the 'Dull O Gwynedd,' or Venedotian Code of North Wales, it is ordained that the judge of the court 'is to have from the chief groom his horse, complete from the first nail to the last, and saddled, and brought to him when he rides.' Amongst the other privileges and duties of the groom of the rein, 'he is to have his land free, his horse in attendance, and his clothing like the rest; his woollen clothing from the king, and his linen clothing from the queen.' He is 'to have the king's rain-caps in which he shall ride; his old bridles, his old hose, his spurs, his brass-mounted saddles, and all his horse equipage. He is to officiate in the absence of the chief groom. He is to hold the king's stirrup when he mounts and when he alights, and lead his horse to the stable, and bring it to him on the following day. He is always to walk near the king, that he may serve him when necessary. He is to shoe the king's horse. . . . . . . . His protection is, from the time the smith of the Court shall begin to make four horse-shoes, with their complement of nails, until he places them under the feet of the kings horse, to convey away an offender.' The duties of the smith were:—'He is to make all the necessaries of the palace gratuitously, except three things: these are, the suspending irons of the rim of a caldron, the blade of a coulter, the socket of a fuel-axe, and head of a spear; for each of these three things he is to be paid the value of his labour. He is to do what is wanted by the officers of the palace gratuitously; they are to present him with clothes for each piece of work. He is entitled to the "ceinion."[20] His seat in the palace is on the end of the bench, near the priest of the household. His protection is, from the time he shall begin his work in the morning until he shall finish at night.'
There were three arts which the son of a taeog (or villain) was not allowed to learn 'without the permission of his lord; and if he should learn them, he must not exercise them, except a scholar, after he has taken holy orders: these are scholarship, smithcraft, and bardism.'
To show the value put upon the extremity of a horse's limb, it is enacted that 'the worth of a horse's foot is his full worth.'[21]
'Four horse-shoes (Pedeyr pedhol), with their complement of nails, are two pence in value;' a small sum, if the Welsh money bore a like value to that then current among the Anglo-Saxons, five of their pence making one shilling. Then follows a list and valuation of the appliances of a Celtic smith:—
'The tools of a smith, six-score pence:
The large anvil, three-score pence:
The brick-orne anvil, twelve pence:
The bellows, eight pence:
The smith's pincers, four pence:
The smith's sledge, four pence:
A paring-knife (for the hoofs ?— Cammec-pedeyr
Keynnyanc), four pence:
A bore (or punch — Kethraul), four pence:
A groover (Knysyll), four pence:
A vice, four pence:
A hoof-rasp (Carnllyf), four pence.'
This enumeration is curious, as we observe in the list several of the articles found in the Druidical mound at Alesia, in Gaul.
The Dimetian, or 'South Wales Code,' is in some respects similar to that of the Venedotian. 'The protection of the groom of the rein is, whilst the smith of the Court makes four shoes with their complement of nails, and whilst he shall shoe the king's steed,' [22] The protection of the groom of the rein to the queen was the same.
The smith of the Court was to have the heads of the oxen and cows slaughtered in the palace, and food for himself and servant from the palace; as well as the feet of all the cattle,[23] and other privileges. The worth of his tools was also six-score pence. 'Three arts which a taeog is not to teach to his son without the permission of his lord: scholarship, smithcraft, and bardism: for if the lord be passive until the tonsure be performed on the scholar; or until the smith enter his smithy; or until a bard be graduated in song,—he cannot afterwards enslave them,' proving that the smith was a freeman.
The trinal, or tripartite, system was sometimes curiously applied:—'There are three fires, kindled by a person on his own land, which are not cognizable in law: the fire of heath-burning, from the middle of March to the middle of April; the fire of a hamlet kiln; and the fire of a hamlet smithy, that shall be nine paces from the hamlet, and having either a covering of broom or of sod thereon.'[24]
In these laws we find the smith and his craft, horse-shoes, and horses, remarkably mixed up in those triads that seem to be so strangely related to the symbolism of the ancient world:—the mystic number 3, the pyramid, triangle, the basis of the mysterious ogive; the number that was considered holy at the first dawn of civilization, that is found wherever variety is developed, and that meets us everywhere. The Welsh laws afford us a striking instance of the influence of this wonderful numeral. 'Three things for which, if found on a road, no one is bound to answer (or be responsible for taking possession of): a horse-shoe (pedol), a needle, and a penny.' 'There are three one-footed animals: a horse, a hawk, and a
legs of the oxen and kine obtained by his information, to make boots to the height of his ankles.' greyhound: whosoever shall break the leg of any one of them, let him pay his whole worth.'
In the Gwentian Code, applicable to the district inhabited by the Silures, it is written: 'The protection of the groom of the rein is, to conduct the person while the smith of the Court makes four shoes, with their sets of nails, and shall shoe the kings steed.' 'The groom of the rein has the king's daily saddle, his panel, his bridle, his spurs, his hose, and his rain-cap when discarded; also his old horse-shoes (hen pedolen), and his shoeing-irons (heyrn pedoli).'[25] In the triads of the 'Cyrethian' we find: 'Three free sons of the bond: a clerk, a bard, and a smith. Three bond sons of the free: the sons of the above.' Of the king's hall it is ordered: 'The servants are apportioned in three parts, one third to the queen . . . . . The smith (gof) of the Court is to sit in a chair before the judge (near a column), which column the silentiary is to strike, on the side furthest from the king, when commanding silence.' In the 'Leges Wallice,' of about the same date, there is also another paragraph relating to our subject: 'Refugium gwastrant awyn (equisonis) est, conducere hominem tanto tempore quanto faber curie faciet IIIIor ferra cum clauis, et cum eo ferret dextrarium regis.'[26]
Oxen alone were used for the plough: 'Neither horses, mares, or cows, are to be put to the plough; and if they should be put, and abortion should ensue to either mares or cattle, or the horses be injured, it is not to be compensated.'[27] These extracts from the ancient laws of Wales which may have been—and we have every reason to believe were—in existence centuries before the reign of Howel the Good, show in the most unmistakable manner that farriery was practised and held in high estimation by the primitive people of Britain, that the Court farrier was a sacred sort of personage, on whose shoulders the mystic mantle of the Druid iron-workers had fallen, and whose handicraft was not to be practised by every one.
It is very strange that, in relation to this subject, these laws of Wales have never before been examined.
Sir Walter Scott appears to have sanctioned the popular opinion, afterwards maintained by Sir P Meyrick, Bracy Clark, and other notabilities, that these ancient Britons, the Welsh, did not shoe their horses. In one of his miscellaneous poems, the 'Norman Horse-Shoe,' composed in 1806, he relates an engagement on the banks of the Rymny, between the Norman Lords-Marchers of Monmouthshire, Clare, Earl of Striguil and Pembroke, and Neville, Baron of Chepstow, and the Welshmen of Glamorgan. The piece is prefaced by the announcement, that the Welsh, inhabiting a mountainous country, and possessing only an inferior breed of horses, were usually unable to resist the shock of the Anglo-Norman cavalry. On this occasion they were successful, notwithstanding that the horses of the latter were shod: —
'Red glows the forge in Striguil's bounds,
And hammers din, and anvil sounds,
And armourers, with iron toil,
Barb many a steed for battle's broil.
Foul fall the hand which bends the steel
Around the courser's thundering heel,
That e'er shall dint a sable wound
On fair Glamorgan's velvet ground!
· · · · · · · ·
Old Chepstow's brides may curse the toil.
That arm'd stout Clare for Cambrian broil;
Their orphans long the art may rue.
For Neville's war-horse forged the shoe.
No more the stamp of arméd steed
Shall dint Glamorgan's velvet mead;
Nor trace be there, in early spring,
Save of the Fairies' emerald ring.'
After the evidence we have adduced, there is no reason to suppose that Glamorgan's velvet mead was not as likely to be dinted by the shoe-print of the Welsh horses after, as doubtless it had been long centuries before, this sanguinary skirmish; or that Neville's horse's hoofs were any better prepared for marching and fighting than that of the British chief who defeated him.
Besides all this, there are certain traditions afloat belonging to an early period, concerning hoof-prints and marks of horse-shoes on stones, which, if incorrect, so far as an examination of these impressions proves them to be, yet point to the prevalence of shoeing at a very remote age. For instance, there is an old tradition that, in the west of England, not far from the Devil's Coit, St Colomb, and standing on the edge of the Gossmoor, there is a large stone, upon which are deeply-impressed marks, which a little fancy may convert into the imprints of four horseshoes. This is 'King Arthur's Stone,' and these marks were made, so says tradition, by the horse upon which the ancient British king rode when he resided at Castle Denis, and hunted on these moors.[28] Sir Walter Scott, in the 'Bridal of Triermain,'[29] describes an adventure of the same King, where he is tempted to drink from a goblet by Guendolen; but when he—
'Lifted the cup, in act to drink,
A drop escaped the goblet's brink—
Intense as liquid fire from hell,
Upon the charger's neck it fell.
Screaming with agony and fright
He bolted twenty feet upright—
The peasant still can show the dint
Where his hoofs lighted on the flint.'
It is remarkable to find this tradition of hoof-prints in existence beyond England, and to note that it refers to nearly as early a date. On the black rocks of the Dame de Meuse, in the Ardennes, Belgium, is still shown the ineffaceable imprint left there by the horse on which Renaud was mounted. This valiant knight was the supposed contemporary of Charlemagne; his astounding deeds of prowess almost rival those of our own Arthur, and towards the termination of his career he became a chevalier mason, carrying on his back all the enormous blocks of stone required to build the 'Sainte Eglise' at Cologne.
My curiosity was considerably excited, when, in the course of recent researches, I found that a correspondent to 'Notes and Queries,' had sent the following letter to that valuable periodical, in January, 1864: 'Can any of your readers inform me when horses were first shod with iron? I have just had brought to me a stone about five inches over, on which is plainly impressed the mark of a pony's or mule's shoe. It was found near the stone pits, on the Blackdown Hills, between Honiton and Cullompton.'
With some difficulty, I at length discovered the gentleman into whose hands this geological specimen had fallen, Mr Matthews, of Bradninch, near Cullompton, Devonshire, and on my applying to him for an inspection of it, he most kindly and promptly sent it to me.
The resemblance of the impression to the form of a horse-shoe was undoubtedly most striking (fig.103), and in
size it exactly corresponded to one of the Roman Gloucester shoes then in my possession. There were no bulgings, however, on the outer margin; and yet it was so remarkably like the shoe, and like the impression it would make on sand or clay, that any one at the first glance, and who was not a geologist, would have had no hesitation in affirming it to be due to that cause. But an examination of the stone effectually demolished such an opinion. It belonged to a kind called in technical language 'chert,' a sand-stone that underlies the chalk formation, and occurs in the lower green sand; and the imprint had been formed long ages before horses or Druid blacksmiths had worn or made hoof-plates on the more recent and superficial strata of our present earth.
Sir C. Lyell has given an opinion with regard to this curiosity. He says, ' Most of the horse-shoe impressions, of which I have seen a great many in the older stratified rocks of Scotland, have been thought to imply the former presence of medusæ, but this is a mere conjecture, derived from finding similar impressions made on the sands on which such gelatinous bodies rest. They have nothing to do with the footprints of horses.'
Professor Tennant, of the Strand, London, most obligingly undertook to explain the nature of the horse-shoe imprint, and the mode of its formation. It was only necessary for him to fit into it a petrified zoophyte, whose base, like the bottom of a champagne bottle, had perhaps made scores of these 'Man Friday' tracks, to settle the question. One of these creatures had settled itself upon the soft sand, when there was nobody present to note the circumstance; the almost circular indent made by its cup-like basis had escaped obliteration, the sand became rock,—fine, close, and hard enough to sharpen a scythe-blade, and to render the Devonshire scythe-stone pits famous; and long after subsequent races of creatures had passed away—even the Druids and aboriginal horses, the whilom resting-place of this half-animal, half-vegetable, had been revealed, and a chip knocked off one of its sides. So much for the traditions of hoof-prints.
After the departure of the Romans from Britain, and the invasion of the Saxons, Angles, and Jutes, we find history for a long period nothing but a tissue of traditions. We may believe that the Saxons occasionally, if not constantly, shod their horses; but whether in the same fashioned shoe that the ancient Britons and Gauls used, is a matter for doubt. Mr Syer Cuming[30] says he has seen a shoe very like in form that which Chifflet describes as found in Childeric's tomb, and which was said to have been discovered with Saxon weapons in Kent. It was of small size, very thin, and much oxidized. Elsewhere, at a later period, he remarks: 'The question regarding the employment of horse-shoes by the Teutonic tribes of Britain has received some slight elucidation. I feel confident that the Anglo-Saxons shod their steeds, and that they called the metal shoe calc-rond, i.e. rim-shoe; though Bosworth says the name signifies a round hoof; and my confidence is supported by the fact of the discovery of some horse-shoes in a Saxon burial-place in Berkshire. Mr T. Wills permits me to lay before you a horse-shoe, which there seems good reason to regard as of Saxon origin; it is about three inches and seven-eighths long, exceedingly thin, agreeing in this respect with the previously-mentioned horse-shoe found with Saxon remains in Kent, and the iron of which it is composed is of that peculiar ropy kind, so characteristic of the Anglo-Saxon era. It is sharp at the extremities, has no calkins, and the six large, square nail-holes are cut clean through the substance, and not counter-sunk to receive the nail-heads. This curious specimen was recovered from the northern side of the Thames, about midway between Dowgate and Blackfriars Bridge.'[31]
We may be allowed to entertain some doubts as to the meaning of the Anglo-Saxon term 'calc-rond,' especially as applied to a 'rim-shoe' for horses. The Saxon for shoe is 'sceo' or 'þcoh;' and the verb to shoe 'þceozan;' while the smith is written as in German, þmið.
It would appear certain that, as with the invasion of Gaul by the Franks, another form of shoe gradually came into use in England on the arrival of the Saxons. We have but little to lead us to believe that this German race cared much for the horse, or employed it to any extent at first. In this respect they resembled the Frank. In process of time, however, they became expert horsemen, and placed much value upon the noble beast; in this they again followed the example of the Franks—a change that might be attributed, in both instances, to their having come into contact with another race—the Celtic,—to whom the horse had for ages been an all-important adjunct of existence. This is rendered apparent from the fact, that those of the Britons who cared to remain among the invaders, were intrusted with the studs of the Anglo-Saxon kings. In the laws of Ina, written towards the termination of the seventh or commencement of the eighth century, the 'hors-wealh' stands in high estimation. This functionary was a Welshman, or rather an ancient Briton, who had the charge of the king's stud, his knowledge of horses apparently justifying his being selected to attend to them, as the British inhabitants excelled in the care and management of these creatures, and were therefore preferred as keepers of the royal stables. The 'hors-weard,' or watchers of the lord's horses, are also specially mentioned in the laws of Æthelbirht and Ina (sixth and seventh centuries). The Anglo-Saxon laws, it must be remembered, are far behind those of the Britons, and leave us fewer details concerning the domestic life of the people. We will see hereafter that the smith and his craft occupied a somewhat important position with this people, though perhaps less than with the Britons.
So late as the time of Bede (seventh century) we find it stated that the English only began to use saddle-horses (631), when prelates and others rode on horseback, who till that time were wont to go on foot. But if, he adds, upon any urgent occasion they were obliged to ride, they used mares only. Fosbrooke thinks this notice refers to the heathen Anglo-Saxon priests, who were disgraced by being compelled to ride on mares. It is true that in several parts of the world it is reckoned an indignity to use a mare for this purpose—in South America, for example. And in Java it appears to be looked upon as a punishment, for Crawfurd[32] mentions that, in the 16th century, a rebel chief was subdued by the Prince of Mataram, and the conqueror, without offering him any further injury, directed a lame mare to be brought, on which, barebacked, and with a miserable bridle, he mounted his discomfited rival, and in this plight dismissed him to his chief, to tell the story of his disgrace. 'It is necessary to explain,' adds Mr Crawfurd, 'that in Java it is considered a disgrace to ride a mare; none but the meanest of the people using mares for the saddle.'
The indignity of being compelled to ride mares did not continue very long with the English monks, who soon became owners of the best-conditioned horses in the land, and were as devoted slaves to hunting, and other amusements of a similar character, as any beyond the monastery doors. When the archdeacon of Richmond arrived at Bridlington, Yorkshire (in 1216), to be inducted to the priory, he was accompanied by ninety-seven horses, twenty-one dogs, and three hacks. In 1256, Walter de Suffield, bishop of Norwich, bequeathed by will his pack of hounds to the king; whilst the abbot of Tavistock, who had also a pack, was commanded by his bishop, in 1348, to break it up. William de Clowne, abbot of Leicester, who died in 1377, had so good a stud, and was so skilful in hare-hunting, that the king, his son Edward, and several noblemen, paid him an annual pension that they might hunt with him. Wycliffe, who lived at this time, in his 'Trialogue,' inveighs against the priests for their 'fair horses, and jolly gay saddles and bridles ringing by the way.' And Chaucer does as much in his admirable delineation of the monk of his day:—
'A monk there was, a fair for the mastery;
An out-rider that lovéd venerie (hunting);
A manly man to be an abbot able.
Full many a dainty horse had he in stable.
· · · · · · · ·
Therefore he was a prickasour (hard rider) a right:
Greyhounds he had as swift as foul (birds) of flight:
Of pricking (hard riding), and of hunting for the hare
Was all his lust; for no cost would he care.'
On the Continent, in 1180, the third council of Lateran prohibited this amusement while bishops were journeying from one abbey to another, and restricted them to a train of forty or fifty horses![33]
But the Anglo-Saxons, even so early as the time of Bede,[34] in their youth or 'childhood,' appear to have excelled in horse-racing. Hunting on horseback was a favourite pastime, and we are told how long the chases were, and how rugged the paths.[35] An ealdorman's'[36] heriot or claim to that title was the fact of his possessing four horses saddled and four not saddled, with arms and money; while the king's thegn or baron must own a moiety of that number, and the middling thegn or knight, one-fourth.[37]
Horses must have been numerous and looked upon as an important acquisition, even by the Danish invaders; for in the reign of Ethelred (866) these people made one of their incursions into England in numbers never before equalled, and were allowed by that monarch to locate themselves for the winter in East Anglia, So bold were they in their strength, that they levied demands upon the king; and among the many items he was compelled to furnish was a supply of horses, which mounted the greatest part of their army.[38]
Horses also appear to have been very acceptable gifts. For, 926, we read that Hugues, the son of King Robert of France, presented Athelstan of England with three hundred fine coursers and their trappings, besides other valuables.[39] Athelstan enacted that 'no man shall send any horses over sea, but such as be presents.'[40]
In the reign of this monarch it is probable that horses were used for ploughing; for in one of his laws (16) it is ordained that 'every man have to the plough two well-horsed men.' From these laws we also learn, that a horse was valued at half a pound, 'if it be so good; and if it be inferior, let it be paid for by the worth of its appearance, and not by that which the man values it at who owns it, unless he have evidence that it be as good as he says.'
About this period, too, tournaments began to be popular among the Anglo-Saxons. In 934, Henry the First of Germany published his institutions concerning them, and certain classes and persons were forbidden to engage in them under penalty of losing their horses.[41] Even previous to this period, Nithard mentions that some French gentlemen fought in play on horseback.[42]
It has often been asserted that the Anglo-Saxons had no cavalry in the days of Harold, and that their defeat at the battle of Hastings was chiefly due to the absence of that arm from their force. This would appear, however, to be incorrect. At the decisive battle between that unfortunate monarch and the Danish invader, Hardrada, at Stamford Bridge, in the East Riding of Yorkshire, only a few days before the appearance of the Normans and the battle of Hastings, the Anglo-Saxons were so strong in cavalry that the Danes, who were chiefly infantry, had to dispose themselves in a particular order of battle in order to repel the fierce attacks of these horsemen.[43]
After the defeat of the Danes, Harold hurried back to London to meet the Normans, but through disgust at his behaviour, and perhaps owing to the long distance and the fatigue they had already undergone, his northern army appears to have been almost, if not entirely, dispersed. But even at the battle of Hastings, though the footmen formed the chief part of his army, there was a force of cavalry; this, however, was purposely dismounted and incorporated with the other portion, owing to the position of the Anglo-Saxons on hilly ground.
The weapons of our Anglo-Saxon ancestors were purely Teutonic, and so far as the examples furnished by their graves afford evidence, it would appear they borrowed nothing from the Romans. In battle they fought as Saxons; and it was only when they came into contact, socially, with the people who had preceded them, that they felt the superiority of the Romans in the arts of peace.[44] They carried their manners and customs with them into England, as well as their peculiar arms and equipment, and with these also, perhaps, their own form of horse-shoe. Certain it is, that from the time of their achieving their supremacy in England, the characteristic bulging-bordered shoe of the earlier ages appears rapidly to have gone out of fashion. A specimen of the new kind of shoe, which was found in Fleet Ditch, in 1847, will make this change manifest (fig. 104).
 |
This may have been of a later date than some of the other Saxon shoes, but it was in all probability in use before the Norman conquest. It was very small, thin, and without calkins. Mr Syer Cuming, alluding to this shoe and the alteration in its shape, lays some stress on the form assumed by the inner margin, which in the Celtic pattern, he says, is the figure of a Norman arch, and this Saxon shoe that of an arch of the 15th century. The very ancient specimen in the British Museum, however, which was found with Roman remains, is narrow across the toe, and the third York Museum example is the same.
In one of the Fairford graves opened by Mr Wylie,[45] and which apparently belonged to the Saxon period, a small, thin plate of iron 'like a miniature horse-shoe was found.' In the drawing given, however, there are no traces of nail-holes.
At Caenby, near Lincoln, Mr Jarvis[46] reports, that in a tumulus opened by some workmen, there was found a skeleton, a sword-blade, horse-furniture, and a horse-shoe. This was supposed to have been a Saxon grave. No drawing or description is given of this shoe.
Some years ago, a Saxon tomb was opened on Brighton Downs, and with some characteristic remains was found a horse-shoe, which fell into the hands of the late Mr Faussett. After that gentleman's death, his collection of antiquities passed to Mr Mayer, of Liverpool, who presented them to the Free Public Museum of that town. Unfortunately, of the dozen specimens of horseshoes in that building there appears to be but little, if any, history to be obtained; nearly all the specimens belong to the Rolfe collection, and but one to that named the Faussett, and this, I presume, is that from the grave at Brighton. Mr Mayer appears, from the statement given to me by the sub-curator of the museum, to think it might be Roman, but the shoe is not of the usual Roman type. It has apparently eight nail-holes, is 5¼ inches long and 4½ wide, and the breadth of the branch is about 1½ inch (fig. 105).
 |
It may be added, that in the Rolfe collection there are two or three specimens of apparently the same age, and several of a later period. But these lose their value through having lost the history of their discovery.
Two remarkably curious specimens of a similar kind to that from Fleet Ditch were discovered in 1854, at Horred Hill, parish of Gillingham, Kent, deeply imbedded in brick clay. In appearance they look even more primitive than that example, and one (fig. 106) would appear to have been made during the transition from the Roman to the Saxon shape. It is of the same size as the Hod Hill shoe, but has more breadth of iron.
 |
| fig. 106 |
The border is not undulated, and the nailholes, though large, are square; there is no socket for the nail-head. One side, which has no calkin, has four nail-holes; and the other side, which has a calkin formed exactly like the Roman and Gaulish specimens by doubling over the extremity of the branch, has only three. The iron appears to be remarkably good and fibrous, and much resembles that of the Saxon weapons made of that metal.
 |
| fig. 107 |
The other shoe (fig. 107) is almost identically the same so far as regards size, but it is apparently of more recent date than the other, though still very primitive. It has two calkins raised at the extremities of the branches, and these, though very low and thin, are formed as in modern times. Wide at the toe and sides, it is very narrow and light towards the heels, has four square nail-holes on one side, and three on the other. Both specimens are very light, slightly concave to the foot, and convex to the ground surface, and would fit a horse about thirteen or fourteen hands high. From circumstances connected with their discovery, they were surmised to be at least a thousand years old.
 |
Some years ago there were found in a graveyard in Berkshire (already alluded to by Mr Cuming) three horse-shoes accompanied by purely Saxon remains. Drawings of these and their accompanying relics are now in the possession of Mr C. Roach Smith, and to him I am indebted for permission to copy the former. It will be seen that one of the shoes (fig. 1 08), the smallest (4 inches in length and width), is of the primitive type, and still retains a nail; while the other two (figs. 109, 110) are comparatively large and heavy, one with calkins, the other without; both have the even border, and but little to distinguish them from mediæval horse-shoes.
 |
The occurrence of these two varieties in the same place, along with unmistakable Saxon relics, testifies that they were both in use at this period, and reminds us of the Frankish specimens found in Belgium. Mr Roach Smith informs me that no particular account of the find reached him.
We have evidence that, in the time of Harold, horses must have been generally shod for service in the field. Dart,[47] in his History of York, says that at Battle Flats, six miles east of that city, the scene of the conflict between Harold and the Danes under Tostig (A.D. 1066), 'the farmers in ploughing frequently turn up a very small sort of horse-shoes, which would only fit an ass or the least breed of northern horses;' and Camden,[48] in speaking of the ancient village of Aldby, remarks: 'Aldby may have been a Roman before it was a Saxon villa. Stanford bridge has the name of Battle Bridge in writings after the Conquest, such as the instrument containing Oswis' translation, but it now keeps its antient name, and has no memorial of the battle except a piece of ground on the left hand of the bridge called Battle Flats, in plowing which of late years they find pieces of swords, and a sort of small horse-shoes that could only fit an ass or the smallest breed of northern horses, but are proofs of the antiquity of shoeing in England.'
It is much to be regretted that no description can be found of these articles.
In the Anglo-Saxon manuscripts of an early date, we have additional proof that horses wore shoes. In the accompanying illustration (fig. 111, next page) of a riding Saint, copied from an illuminated manuscript (Tiberius C. 6. fol. 11.) in the Harleian collection of the British Museum, and belonging, it is surmised, to the 11th century, the horse is shod in the most unequivocal manner, each hoof exhibiting three nails.
fig. 111
In another (Plut. 2278), representing a group of Anglo-Saxon equestrians, all the horses are represented as shod, the shoes having calkins, and retained on the hoofs apparently by four nails on each side.
In the Cottonian collection is another manuscript (Nero C. 4), with a series of illustrations of the life of our Saviour, in which is a royal cavalcade, whose horses' feet are all protected with shoes; and also a picture of the flight into Egypt (fol. 7), where the mule or ass has its hoofs yet more distinctly armed. In the same volume is an Anglo-Saxon calendar, and for the month of May there is shown a nobleman hawking on horse-back, the feet of the steed being carefully shod, like those of a hawking equestrian of the 14th century, whose portrait will be referred to shortly.
Matthew of Paris speaks of horses both shod and unshod, and is angry with an archbishop who demanded shoes for unshod horses.[49]
In the 'Chronicon Monasterii de Abingdon,' a document probably of the 10th or 11th century, under the head of rents due to the hostillar is the following entry: 'Hi sunt redditus quos habet hostilarius, ad ƒerramenta equorum, ad usum monachorum, pauperum, peregrinorum, emenda.'[50]
In the 'Speculum Saxonica' (lib. ii. art. 12), it is mentioned that shoes were only applied to the fore-feet. 'Four handsfull of corn shall be given to each horse during the day and night, and the horses shall be shod on the fore-feet (in anterioribus pedibus equi suƒƒerrentur).' In the 'Jus Feudale Saxon.' (cap. 34, pt. 15) it is ordained, 'Their horses ought only to be shod on the fore-feet, and not on the hind-feet.'[51]
It would seem that the Anglo-Saxons experienced the same inconvenience from frost that we now do, for we read that in 832, the year began with excessive rains, and a frost succeeded, which was so sudden and intense, that the iced roads were nearly impassable by horses.[52]
Horses were shod in Scotland, in all probability, at as early a period as in England, though perhaps not regularly. The first written evidence I can find that bears upon this point, is in the laws of Malcolm II. (A.D. 1003 — 1033), which were framed and in force for forty or fifty years before the Norman invasion of England. In one of these laws it is ordained, that when a man was condemned to death, the Crown took possession of his 'broken, unshod horses, and not more than 20 sheep, goats, and pigs,'[53] etc.
More than four centuries later, this statute appears to have been extant; for in the new law of James III. (1487, Parliament 13, cap. 113), it was limited only to those horses intended for servile work (operas serviles destinantur); for if they were unbroken (indomitos) or intractable; or broken and shod, or, in fine, capable of carrying saddles, and being ridden upon, they were not to belong to the Crown.[54]
The Norman invasion and conquest of England (1066) appears to have given rise to the supposition in many quarters, that the art of shoeing was introduced into this country by William the Conqueror. This is quite a mistake, as we have sufficiently shown. Horses had been shod for many centuries in Britain before the arrival of the Normans; and though this practice may not have been, for various reasons, a general one, yet its benefits were sufficiently manifest to make it appreciated, and resorted to in particular circumstances. Another proof, if any more were needed, that the Saxons employed this defence for their horses' feet, would be found in the fact, that Welbeck, in Nottinghamshire, was, at the invasion, in the possession of a Saxon chief named Gamelhere, who was allowed to retain two carucates of land in Cuckeney, on condition that he shod the king's palfreys upon all the feet, with the king's shoes and nails, whenever he visited the manor of Mansfield; and if he put in all the nails, the king was to give him a palfrey worth four marks; or if the horse was lamed in shoeing, the chief had to supply one of like value to the king.[55] A Saxon nobleman unacquainted with the art of shoeing before the conquest of England by William, would not have been deemed a very safe agent in superintending that important operation immediately after that event. If any reliance is to be placed on the Bayeux tapestry, said to have been wrought by Matilda, the wife of the Conqueror, or the Empress Matilda, wife of Henry I. of England, the Normans and the Saxons are in one part represented with their horses shod with heavy shoes, while in another part King Harold's horses have unarmed feet.
The Normans brought many horses with them to England, and it was their cavalry that enabled them to defeat the army of Harold II. From a period far antecedent to that conflict, the Normans were acquainted with the mode of extending the usefulness of the horse by protecting its hoofs with a metallic rim attached by nails; and on their gaining the supremacy in England, the art of shoeing appears to have received marked attention. William gave to Simon St Liz, a Norman nobleman who had accompanied him across the channel, the town of Northampton, and the whole hundred of Falkley, then valued at £40 per annum, to provide shoes for his horses.[56] Another follower, Henry de Farrariis, or Ferrers, is said to have taken his name from the circumstance that he was intrusted with the shoeing of the king's horses, or rather, the control of the shoers; for which his sovereign bestowed upon him the honour of Tutbury, in the county of Stafford.[57] After the Crusades, when it became the custom for families to take coat-armour hereditarily, a charge of six horse-shoes was assumed by this great house.[58] These armorial bearings are, without doubt, much older than the regular establishment of heraldry, and were, with the family name, signs of office. 'This bearing of horse-shoes in armoury,' says Guillim, 'is very ancient, as the arms of Robert Ferrers, Earl Ferrers, testifieth, who lived in the time of King Stephen, and who bore for his arms, argent; six horse-shoes, sable.'[59] The origin of the family name and office is perpetuated by a curious custom. The town of Oakham, the comparatively insignificant capital of the smallest county in England, also lays claim to horse-shoes in its arms, and Guillim relates that it is the chief town in Rutlandshire, seated in a rich valley, and an indifferent good and well-inhabited town. Here is an ancient privilege or custom which the inhabitants claim, that is, 'if any nobleman enter precinct or lordship, as an homage, he is to forfeit one of his horse's shoes, unless he redeem it with money; and the truth of this is apparent by the many horse-shoes nailed upon the shire-hall door; and their badge is a horse-shoe.' This shire-hall is one of the oldest mansions in the kingdom, and was built by Wakelin de Ferrers, son of an earl of that name.
Evelyn, travelling in 1654, writes in his Diary: 'I took a journey into the northern parts. Riding through Oakham, a pretty town in Rutlandshire, famous for the tenure of the barons, who held it by the taking off a shoe from every nobleman's horse that passed with his lord through the street, unless redeemed with a certain piece of money. In token of this are several gilded shoes nailed on the castle gate.' And Gough, in his Camden, asserts that the bailiff of the town had power to take a shoe off the horse of any man of noble birth who declined to pay the tribute money; the amount to be paid being left to the equestrian's generosity, while his liberality regulated the size of the horse-shoe inscribed with his name and title, which was set up to commemorate the event.
The origin of this singular impost or tenure is not known. A recent visitor, an army veterinary surgeon, says: 'I was much amused about four years ago, when marching through Oakham, a town in Rutlandshire, to find a very arbitrary law in existence there. On looking over the court-house, I found the walls literally covered with horse-shoes, and some of them of the most exaggerated and fantastic shape, gilt and emblazoned with the heraldic devices peculiar to their donors, and others the simple shoe. When I questioned the worthy old guide relative to the eccentricity of the act, he informed me that it originated with Elizabeth. Her Majesty, when passing through that town, found one of her horses lame from the loss of a shoe, and there was no one who could replace it. She forthwith issued a mandate compelling all peers of the realm to forfeit a horse's shoe when passing through the locality, or the payment of a fine. The proceeds accruing therefrom were devoted to the maintenance of a blacksmith.'[60] This tradition is not a very probable one, as it conflicts with nearly all the others; the custom is, in all likelihood, of an earlier date than the days of Queen Elizabeth.
Blount, in his 'Jocular Tenures,' informs us that a Duke of York once paid a silver horse-shoe to Lord Ferrers, and that a silver horse-shoe is due from every scion of royalty who rides across one of his manors. Of the shoes seen by Evelyn, three at least are said to remain—those bearing the names of Earl Gainsborough, Henry Montagu, and Lord Gray. Among the more notable ones of later date are those presented by the Earl of Cardigan in 1667, Lord Ipswich in 1687, Lord Guildford in 1690, and Lady Percy in 1771. More than thirty years ago, Queen Victoria acknowledged the right of Oakham, as her uncles, the Prince Regent and the Duke of York, had done before her; and the late Duke of Wellington soon followed her example. The law itself has sanctioned this unique species of taxation, Lords Denham, Campbell, and Wensleydale having followed the precedent of the famous Lord Mansfield. The day upon which Lord Campbell's horse-shoe was added to the collection of trophies, was a red-letter one in the chronicles of Oakham Hall, for on that day it recovered its long-lost 'golden shoe.' This was not really a gold shoe, however, but a gilt one, that had done duty on the hoof of Lord Willoughby d'Eresby's favourite horse 'Clinker.' Deceived by its appearance, or misled by its popular designation, some rogue stole Clinker's shoe. This happened in 1846, and for twelve years the pride of Oakham Hall was conspicuous by its absence; but in 1858, the bailiff of the town was astonished by receiving the long-missing golden shoe per rail, accompanied by some humorous verses; but the thief was never discovered.[61]
The most recent instance of the horse-shoe impost having been levied, is reported in the daily papers for January, 1869:—
'Shoeing a Peer.—A short time since, Lady Louisa Finch, Lord Redesdale, Mr Campbell (who were on a visit to George Finch, Esq., Burley-on-the-Hill), and G. H. Finch, Esq., M.P. for Rutland, paid a visit to Oakham Castle to inspect the Old Norman Hall (the oldest in England except Westminster Hall) and its horse-shoes. This getting to the ears of the bailiff, he was quickly down upon his Lordship for the honour of a shoe. Lord Redesdale selected one similar to those which of late have been fixed on the walls, and the new shoe will shortly be added to the large number now in the castle. The old manorial custom, from which this arises, took place at the first erection of the castle, on the grant to Walchelme de Ferrars, whose ancestors bore arms semé of horse-shoes, as designative of his office of Master of the Horse to the Duke of Normandy. In the early Norman period of our history, grants of customs seem to have been on this principle, that the Lords de Ferrars were entitled to demand from every baron, on his first passing through this lordship, a shoe from one of the horses, to be nailed upon the castle gate, the bailiff of the manor being empowered to stop the horses (and carriages also of late years) until service was performed. The custom is still preserved in Lord Redesdale giving a shoe on the 24th September, 1868.'
Soon after the Norman Conquest, we also find that 'Henry de Averyng held the manor of Morton, in the county of Essex, in capite of our Lord the King, by the serjeantry of finding a man with a horse, value ten shillings, and four horse-shoes (quatuor ƒerris equorum), one sack of barley, and one iron buckle, as often as it may happen that our Lord the King should go with his army into Wales, at his own proper expense for forty days.'[62] These acts will testify to the high value put upon shoeing by the early Norman kings.
It is rather amusing to read Bracy Clark's history of the introduction of shoeing into Britain by the Normans, and how the evil they had carried with them—for Bracy Clark's sole idea seemed to be that shoeing was an unmitigated evil—recoiled upon themselves, and caused the death of King William. He points the moral by stating, that the conqueror lost his life through his horse falling with him in jumping a ditch where the ground was slippery, for if the animal had not been shod he would not have fallen. 'Thus,' he says, 'the monarch who was the first to introduce the art of shoeing into England, was one of the first and most celebrated victims.' And M. Nicard believes this statement, and explains how the accident occurred. The death of the king may have been caused by his horse falling with him, though that is a rather doubtful matter, as one account has it that he died from the effects of a wound sustained in France; at any rate, it is certain that he was not the first, by perhaps at least ten centuries, to introduce the art of shoeing into Britain.
- ↑ Agricola, ii.
- ↑ For proof of this, see that most interesting collection of traditional poetry translated from the Welsh by Mr Skene, entitled 'The Four Ancient Books of Wales.' Edinburgh, 1868. The poem designated the 'Triads of the Horses' is very remarkable.
- ↑ Bell. Gall., lib. iv. cap. 24—26.
- ↑ Cæsar. Op. cit., lib. iv. cap. 33.
- ↑ Cæsar. Op. cit. lib. v. cap. 15, 16.
- ↑ History of Ancient Wiltshire, London, 1812—21. Fosbroke is the authority for this statement. I have carefully looked through Hoare's splendid work, but can find no mention of these articles;neither is any notice of them to be found in his Guide to the Wiltshire Barrows.
- ↑ Ibid., p. 121.
- ↑ Gough. Camden's Britannia.
- ↑ Pop. Antiquities of Wales.
- ↑ I am indebted to A. J. Owles, Esq., Enniskilling Dragoons, for photographs of these fine specimens.
- ↑ Archæologie, vol. xiv. p. 4.
- ↑ Journal of the Archæological Association, vol. vi.
- ↑ Journal of the Archæological Association, vol. xiv.
- ↑ An analytical chemist who examined it, informed me that it was the rarer metal titanium.
- ↑ I am deeply indebted to J. D. T. Niblett, Esq., M.A., F.S.A., of Tutfley, near Gloucester, for an inspection, and the particulars connected with the discovery of these three specimens.
- ↑ In the Catalogue of the Museum, it is stated that 'some of the iron objects are not Roman, but mediæval, and to one or two a still more recent date must be assigned.'
- ↑ Collectanea Antiqua, vol. vi. p. 10.
- ↑ Recueil, vol. iii. plate 9.
- ↑ Gentleman's Magazine, p. 518, 1848.
- ↑ The ceinion was the first liquor that came into the hall.
- ↑ Book iii. chap. 4. We are reminded by this of the saying of Jeremiah Bridges, 'No Foot no Horse;' or, as our French friends have it, 'Pas de Pied, pas de Cheval.'
- ↑ Book i. chap. 7.
- ↑ The ancient Welsh used the legs of cow-hides for shoes. In the Venedotian Code, it is specified that the king's apparitor is to have 'thelegs of the oxen and kine obtained by his information, to make boots to the height of his ankles.'
- ↑ Book ii. chap. 8.
- ↑ Book i. chap. 6.
- ↑ Book i. chap. vii.
- ↑ Venedotian Code. Book iii. chap. 24.
- ↑ Romances of the West of England. First Series, p. 204.
- ↑ Canto ii. 10.
- ↑ Journal of the Archæological Association, vol. vi.
- ↑ Op. cit. vol. xiv.
- ↑ Indian Archipelago, vol. ii. p. 324.
- ↑ Velly. Hist, de France, vol. iii. p. 236.
- ↑ Hist. Eccles., lib. v. cap. 6.
- ↑ Life of St Dunstan. Cotton MSS. Cleop. B. 13.
- ↑ The 'ealdorman,' or 'aldormanus' was, among the Anglo-Saxons, originally a dignitary of the highest rank, hereditarily and officially, and nearly synonymous with that of King.
- ↑ Leges Anglo-Saxonicæ.
- ↑ Asser. De Rebus Gestis Æifredi, p. 15. Edit. Oxford, 1772.
- ↑ MSS. Cleop. B. 5.
- ↑ 'Nemo equum aliquem ultra mare mittat nisi eum donare velit.'— Legis Æthelst.
- ↑ Goldastus. Constitutiones Imperialis, vol. ii. p. 41.
- ↑ Turner. Hist. Anglo-Saxons, vol. iii. p. 130.
- ↑ See Snorre's Sagas.
- ↑ Wright. The Celt, the Roman, and the Saxon, p. 415.
- ↑ Fairford Graves. Oxford, 1852.
- ↑ Akerman. Remains of Pagan Saxondom.
- ↑ Eboracum, p. 84.
- ↑ Britannia, vol. iii. p. 69.
- ↑ Fosbroke. Op. cit.
- ↑ De Consuetudiuibus Abbendoniæ.
- ↑ Du Cange. Glossarium.
- ↑ Annales Ruberi, p. 56.
- ↑ Leges Malcomi Secundi, cap. 3. De Feodo Institiarii, Clericorum, etc. 4. 'Item, de homine condemnato ad mortem. Coram Justitiaro, coronator habebit equos domitos non ƒerratos; oves infra viginti, capras, et porcos, infra decem,' etc
- ↑ Skeene. Regiam Majestatem Scotiæ. Edinburgh, 1609.
- ↑ Thornton's Nottinghamshire, p. 447.
- ↑ Dugdale. Baron., vol. i. p. 58. Blount's Tenures, p. 50.
- ↑ Brooke. Discovery of Errors in the Catalogue of the Nobility, p. 198.
- ↑ Ibid. p. 65.
- ↑ Ths present Earl Ferrers has, as one of the supporters in his coat of arms, a reindeer charged on the shoulder with a horse-shoe.—Vide Burke's Peerage List.
- ↑ F. F. Collins, Royal Dragoons. The Veterinarian, p. 663, 1867.
- ↑ Chambers's Journal.
- ↑ Blount's Tenures, p. 16.