Recently, several Younger Roman Iron Age complexes with parts of splendid horse harnesses from western Ukraine have come to my attention. Since the area north-east of the Carpathians and east of the Boh River had previously been a blank spot on the map in this respect and the assemblages are of supra-regional importance for the archaeology of the Roman Iron Age in Barbaricum, it seemed not only worthwhile but also necessary to present and study them. However, it is important to note that the assemblages from Rykhtychi (Рихтичі, Дрогобицький ра­йон), presumed to be from Stinka (Стінкa, Золочівський район) and from Toboliw (To­бo­лiв, Шептицький район), all located in the Lviv Region (Львівська область), and from the Zhytomyr Region (Житомирська область), though the precise location is unknown) have unfortunately been discovered illegally using metal detectors. These assemblages have been recovered in an uncontrolled manner and subsequently offered for sale on internet forums. Fortunately, the artefacts from Rykhtychi (Fig. 2, 3) were saved from vanishing – they are now in the collection of the Archaeological Museum of Ivan Franko University in Lviv and can be studied in autopsy. The situation is different, however, with respect to the complexes from Stinka (Figs. 6, 7, 15–17, 19, 21), Toboliv (Fig. 23) and from the Zhytomyr Region (Fig. 25). Despite extensive research, the investigation yielded no tangible evidence, with the only available documentation being photographs. These images were intended to showcase the ‘treasures’ to potential buyers and provide detailed insights, however, they fail to meet the requisite scientific standards. The illumination quality is often substandard, and the photographs themselves frequently lack the necessary clarity. The use of image processing software enabled the discernment of certain artefacts and the accentuation of details. A further limitation in evaluating the assemblages is the unknown find context. Although follow-up investigations were conducted at Rykhtychi, no evidence of an archaeological feature was found, and no other artefacts were discovered on site. This suggests that the objects may have been selectively deposited and were not grave goods. In the other three cases, the complexes are also incomplete, though for different reasons: the assemblage from Stinka was uncovered by four individuals, who subsequently divided it fairly among themselves; thus, the depiction is limited to the share of one treasure hunter, thus only a quarter of the entire find can be analysed. Despite its wreckage state, the Stinka find is impressive and of high scientific value. The ‘catalogue’ presented here is based on the comprehensive documentation of all the artefacts depicted in the photographs. However, it should be noted that errors, duplications or omissions in the recording of objects cannot be completely ruled out. In contrast, the surviving components of the complexes from Toboliv and from the Zhytomyr Region are significantly less numerous, and their recording posed no problems.

The artefacts discovered at Stinka, Toboliv and in the Zhytomyr Region represent the bridle type Vimose, with the exception of the last, which is accompanied by horse gear that is very similar to that from Illerup (Figs. 5, 30) and from Kazanskaya Stanica, barrow 16, in the Kuban region (Fig. 27). In addition to the bridle elements, other components of the horse’s harness include fittings of saddle straps. In three cases discussed here, these include open-work pieces, which are characteristic of magnificent horse harnesses. These can be described as type Illerup/SARK according to the best survived and documented find from Illerup in Jutland. The characteristic silver-plated rectangular fittings with open-work motifs are Roman-inspired, and a central motif of these works seems to have been the quatrefoil. The remarkable stylistic similarity of horse harnesses of the Illerup/SARK type is remarkable, despite the presence of discernible differences in detail between the individual finds, is striking. The teardrop-shaped fittings from Illerup, Rykhtychi and Kazanskaya Stanica serve as a compelling exemplar of a shared design language, suggesting a cross-regional understanding of design principles. The hypothesis that these fittings could be replaced by cloverleaf-shaped fittings, such as those from Stinka (Fig. 16:22–25) and Toboliv (Fig. 23:7–10), is also posited. All the Ukrainian finds represent high status rider equipment, i.e. horse gear that probably has been offered for some reason. In the case of the Stinka finds, things might be different, as some objects show traces of fire. However, we also know artifacts with traces of melting from safe sacrificial deposits in the Baltic Sea region.

All the complexes presented here include components with opus interrasile in the form of a four-leaf or a flash bundle motif, as well as the motif of rows of semicircles (either as opposed semicircles or in a modified form). Such objects with the discussed, Roman or Roman-inspired motifs are not very common in Germanic Barbaricum (Figs. 34, 37). They appear to be most prevalent in contexts associated with the male sphere, namely personal equipment, armament and horse gear. This observation is particularly noteworthy when contrasted with the prevalence of these motifs in the Western Baltic cultural zone. It is evident that belts adorned with fittings bearing the aforementioned open-work pattern (Figs. 43–45) belong to the warrior costume at the transition from the older to the younger Roman Iron Age. This observation suggests that the motif of opposed semicircles as opus interrasile on belts was exclusive to the male sphere. This phenomenon cannot be considered a mere coincidence and serves to shed light on the individuals who played a pivotal role in disseminating these motifs within the realm of Germanic arts and crafts following the mid-second century. These individuals, characterised by their remarkable mobility and seemingly elite status, appear to have maintained extensive networks that spanned vast geographical regions. Their interactions with the Roman milieu were not superficial but rather entailed the cultivation of profound connections, fostering a shared aesthetic sensibility that manifested itself in their equipment. The rowed semicircle motif is a particularly salient example of this phenomenon, demonstrating the significance of open-work ornaments as a conduit for the exchange of cultural motifs between the Germanic and Roman worlds. The artefacts discovered in western Ukraine demonstrate that bridles of the typologically developed and chronologically younger subtypes of the Vimose type were transported not only to the north, but also to the east of the Middle Danube region. With the exception of Kariv, these artefacts appear to represent the Vimose III subtype (Fig. 51).

The horse harness and bridle finds from Eastern Europe and the Kuban region may appear surprising when considered alongside geographically widespread, stylistically similar discoveries, including those from Illerup (DK), Mödring (A) and Borinka (SLK). However, these findings primarily serve to corroborate a well-established fact: namely, the considerable mobility of Germanic warriors during the Roman Iron Age, particularly in the late 2nd and 3rd centuries.