1. Sources suggest that the army used mules for moving supplies.
Q1. Would mules be distinguishable in the archaeological record from
horses? I guess size may be a clue, but anatomically are they
different?
I suggest you look at Cluny Johnstone's PhD thesis, which is about
differentiating mule bones from horse ones in Roman deposits. "A Biometric Study of Equids in the
Roman World" - http://www.pottoka.info/files/documentos/1225196429_1.pdf
2. Archaeological sources mentioning mules
Q2. Are you aware of any? To be honest I can’t think of an
instance where mules are mentioned.
You could look at some of the Vindolanda tablets (available online
in translation: http://vindolanda.csad.ox.ac.uk/tablets/TVeditions.shtml).
Dr Deb Bennett will be helpful here, I'm sure.
I think when "iumentarii" are mentioned rather than "equi", it's mules
they are talking about. Oddly, this is also the source for the French word for
"mare" - "jument".
Some other sources about horses and the Roman occupation are on my Fell
Pony Museum web site. http;//www.fellponymuseum.org.uk/
3. Although the Roman cavalry is listed in the north have you come
across any references to it in the south east?
Q3. Apparently the cavalry consisted of mercenaries from Germany
and possibly the steppes (Thracian).
Would I be right in thinking that horses from the steppes
would be smaller?
"Smaller than" what? Modern Altai ponies are 13.2 / 13.3 hands high (Fell
pony sized), if that helps.
|