Self carriage is a good characteristic for a horse. But what does it mean? Wilhelm Müseler in ”Riding logic” (1973) describes it like this:
”By self-carriage [or self-collection] we mean the apparently automatic maintenance of the position which the rider has requested the horse to assume. The expression does not refer in any way to a particular degree of collection or a certain outer form. A horse which is properly put to the aids will, with progressive dressage, very soon arrive at this self-collection; it will get there all the sooner the more subtle the rider's aids and the more subtle his rein influences. The opposite of self-collection is the horse leaning heavily on the bit.”
A horse that leans on the bit is not in self-carriage since the horse, if he is leaning on the bit, does not carry his own head! As a rider, you should not have more than the weight of the reins in your hand, otherwise the horse is not carrying its own head.
But "self-carriage" can be about more than just the horse's posture. McGreevy and McLean, two scientists specialising in horses and the horse's welfare, say that self-carriage also means that the horse on his own continues with the behaviour you asked for. This applies to signals from both the hand and legs. Once you have asked the horse to move forward from the legs or hand then the signal should cease once the horse starts to move forward, and the horse should be left alone as long as the horse continues to move forward. The same applies if the horse should trot, canter, rein-back, perform shoulder-in, stop, go on a circle, stand still, piaffe and so on.
De la Guérinière (1731) called this the "descente de main" and "descente de jambe" in French. "Descente de main" is when the rider lowers his hand and opens his fingers so that the contact is lightened. The horse's job is to continue with whatever it was that he was asked to do. "Descente de jambe" is when the rider relaxes her legs and lets them hang like wet towels along the sides of the horse while the horse continues with whatever it was he was asked to do.
Ehrengranat (1836) writes about three degrees of “descent de main”. The first degree gives freedom for the horse's head, the second to the horse's neck and the third opens up for steps to be extended. The first degree of freedom means that contact between the rider's hand and the horse's mouth eases but nothing else happens. Ehrengranat continues "If the horse has followed the aid, it should cease, so that he [the horse] will be left to himself, for as long as the movements in their fullness still continue, no longer."
To me, self-carriage is to hand over responsibility to the horse to maintain speed, direction and posture. I should not have to hold the horse together or support him just in case he will not maintain speed, direction and posture. If and when the horse ceases to do whatever I have asked for, then and only then, should I remind him of what we were doing.
PS Thank you to Mark Stanton of Natural Horsemanship magazine for proof reading!
Thursday 30 December 2010
Wednesday 22 December 2010
A seat that swings
Take a look at the picture, note the location of the skeleton that is in contact with the surface, it is the point which we call the riders seat bones, ie the lowest point of the pelvis (when the pelvis is upright!). Note the hip joint resting freely, well above the base, just like the femur.
As we sit on a horse, the seatbones are in contact with the saddle and on them rests our torso and our legs is hanging along side the horse's sides. The basic idea is that our legs belong to the horse and that they must absorb the movement that is created by the horse's body as it moves.
When walking, there are two movement that the rider should be able to feel in their legs and joints. The calf penduling with abdominal movement (knee joint), and the thigh rolling slightly in the saddle (hip joint). Both of these movements should follow the horse's movements.
The walk also causes a movement in our trunk, it occurs when our seat bones slides forward and back in the saddle in harmony with the movement that occurs in the horse's back in walk.
Many riders receive the movement through a "break" in the lower back. The spine above the lumbar spine is completely rigid and the motion of the horse is only absorbed by the lower back.
If you instead see the spine as a center around which the pelvis moves, rotating maximum a half turn on the left and right side, that movement allows the movement given by the horse's back to billow up through our back up all the way to our shoulders. The spine is straight, the lower back are not exposed to any break and we get a swing in our own back.
In order to perfect compliance, we also strive for a quiet hand - a hand that is stationary in relation to the horse's mouth! This means that the arm needs to be mobile in the shoulder and elbow, so you can keep an even touch with the horse through the bit.
Walk out in the terrain and allow the horse to move you. The feeling is almost like waves on the beach one summer day, some comes in with more force and some splashes softly. Be observant of yourself so that you really let yourself be moved and do not start doing more than required - if you do it is very likely that you "ride more" than the horse actually gives.
Wednesday 15 December 2010
Classical riding
Classical riding is a concept that is used to describe a variety of different styles of riding: competition dressage, what goes on at the Spanish Riding School as well as in Swedish riding schools and so on.
But what does classical really stand for?
Classical riding has its roots in ancient Greece. That culture was different from our modern culture in many ways . René Descartes had not yet put forth his theory about dualism that among other things included the idea that animals do not have a soul and therefore cannot feel pain.
Isaac Newton had not yet defined the law of universal gravitation and the three universal laws of motion that enabled many of the advances of the industrial revolution.
Modern culture is influenced in many ways by these thoughts and concepts, but it is difficult for us who live in this modern culture to really understand to what extent we are influenced by them.
Classical antiquity is, according to Wikipedia, ”a long period of history centred on the Mediterranean Sea, comprising the interlocking civilizations of Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome. This period is conventionally taken to stretch from roughly the 7th or 8th century BC to the 5th century AD. It is often seen as a golden age of Western civilisation, preceding the Dark Ages of the early medieval period.”
Classical riding has its roots in ancient Greece, not juts because we want to call a certain type of riding “classical”, but because Xenophon lived there.
He wrote one of the first books about horses and riding. Here he described the vertical seat and that one should never be angry when handling horses. In ancient Greece body and mind were seen as one unit which according to Loots (Loots, Johannes Marchand (2006) Classical horse riding: a systems theory approach. Doctorial Thesis at Tshwane Technical University, South Africa) meant that how something was achieved was just as important as that it actually was achieved .
Xenophon himself trained horses to be ridden in parades and in battle. For this the horses needed to be accustomed to weapons, sounds of trumpets, flying flags, large crowds of people. The horse also needed to be trained to respond to light signals, to go fast on straight lines and to turn easily in any direction.
Classicism in art refers, again according to Wikipeida, to a high regard for classical antiquity. “It was particularly strong during the Renaissance and from the mid 18th into the 19th century.”
It was during the 18th century that the art of riding reached its zenith and the airs above the ground were developed.
Today something strange, or sad, has happened, at least here in Sweden. Today classical riding is thought to be based on military riding from the beginning of the 20th century.
What happened to the previous history and ideals? Are they completely forgotten?
Classical riding, according to the common opinion here in Sweden, is believed to based on riding from an era that in no other context is defined as either classical or championing the ideals of classicism. The main argument for deviation from the original classical ideas about unity and lightness is that riding has to be allowed to progress. When René Descartes in the 17th century put forth the idea that animals can't feel pain he paved the way for a culture where the ends do justify the means. In the 19th century the military modernised riding further by equating the horse to a steam engine where the riders legs pumped up the steam and the hand directed it.
But the old ideals are not completely lost. Military riding from the 19th and 20th century contains both the old classical ideals as well as the simplified modernised version. Since it takes time to school both horse and rider according to the classical tradition that relies on a high degree of body control and awareness from the rider, it was only the officers that were taught these ideals. The common soldier was taught a simplified and modernised version. I find it dismal that it is this latter, simplified, way of riding that is taught in Swedish riding schools and displayed in competition.
I want something more, what do you want?
But what does classical really stand for?
Classical riding has its roots in ancient Greece. That culture was different from our modern culture in many ways . René Descartes had not yet put forth his theory about dualism that among other things included the idea that animals do not have a soul and therefore cannot feel pain.
Isaac Newton had not yet defined the law of universal gravitation and the three universal laws of motion that enabled many of the advances of the industrial revolution.
Modern culture is influenced in many ways by these thoughts and concepts, but it is difficult for us who live in this modern culture to really understand to what extent we are influenced by them.
Classical antiquity is, according to Wikipedia, ”a long period of history centred on the Mediterranean Sea, comprising the interlocking civilizations of Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome. This period is conventionally taken to stretch from roughly the 7th or 8th century BC to the 5th century AD. It is often seen as a golden age of Western civilisation, preceding the Dark Ages of the early medieval period.”
Classical riding has its roots in ancient Greece, not juts because we want to call a certain type of riding “classical”, but because Xenophon lived there.
He wrote one of the first books about horses and riding. Here he described the vertical seat and that one should never be angry when handling horses. In ancient Greece body and mind were seen as one unit which according to Loots (Loots, Johannes Marchand (2006) Classical horse riding: a systems theory approach. Doctorial Thesis at Tshwane Technical University, South Africa) meant that how something was achieved was just as important as that it actually was achieved .
Xenophon himself trained horses to be ridden in parades and in battle. For this the horses needed to be accustomed to weapons, sounds of trumpets, flying flags, large crowds of people. The horse also needed to be trained to respond to light signals, to go fast on straight lines and to turn easily in any direction.
Classicism in art refers, again according to Wikipeida, to a high regard for classical antiquity. “It was particularly strong during the Renaissance and from the mid 18th into the 19th century.”
It was during the 18th century that the art of riding reached its zenith and the airs above the ground were developed.
Today something strange, or sad, has happened, at least here in Sweden. Today classical riding is thought to be based on military riding from the beginning of the 20th century.
What happened to the previous history and ideals? Are they completely forgotten?
Classical riding, according to the common opinion here in Sweden, is believed to based on riding from an era that in no other context is defined as either classical or championing the ideals of classicism. The main argument for deviation from the original classical ideas about unity and lightness is that riding has to be allowed to progress. When René Descartes in the 17th century put forth the idea that animals can't feel pain he paved the way for a culture where the ends do justify the means. In the 19th century the military modernised riding further by equating the horse to a steam engine where the riders legs pumped up the steam and the hand directed it.
But the old ideals are not completely lost. Military riding from the 19th and 20th century contains both the old classical ideals as well as the simplified modernised version. Since it takes time to school both horse and rider according to the classical tradition that relies on a high degree of body control and awareness from the rider, it was only the officers that were taught these ideals. The common soldier was taught a simplified and modernised version. I find it dismal that it is this latter, simplified, way of riding that is taught in Swedish riding schools and displayed in competition.
I want something more, what do you want?
Wednesday 8 December 2010
out of scale
Now you can buy a gadget that measures the pressure on the reins. It's called EC Hands (a bit witty actually). It works like a fishing scale but the scale is composed of two fields of color, a green for ok and a red to alert that the pressure becomes too high.
I think the idea behind EC Hands is good. The pressure may well vary during a riding session and with this you could "see the variation". Another pressure measure tool is made of plastic and breaks when the limit is reached and passed, but it gives no indication of whether you stay too close to the limit all the time you ride.
But even if I like the idea, I can not hold back a sigh - how did they set their scale!? I had to pull quite hard just to reach the green field, I guess that it was at least 1.5 kg. In order then to get me up to the red zone, I really had to put effort in the pull. The plastic pressure measurer has a minimum weight of 2 kg, so my perception of 1.5 may well be 2. Manufacturers often glance at each other to look for guidance.
During the ISES Conference a research project on horses habituation of the pressure of the bridle was presented. The study showed that horses were not accustomed to the pressure, but tried to avoid it. The maximum pressure they put on the reins once (and never again) was 1 kg, then they exposed themselves to about 600 g.
My reins including a 12.5 cm bridong bit weighs 394 g. To that weight in the horse's mouth I can add up to 200 g and land on a pressure that a horse might accept.
There are research done in the U.S. showing that bit damages horses' mouths. The scale ranges from micro-fracture on the bars to fully visible dental damages.
I have not taken a stand against bits. But I definitely react to how the bit is used and what is considered acceptable in today's riding regarding what riders do with bits and reins.
Therefore, I wish and hope that the producers of "pressure gadgets" dare to adjust their scales so that they begin with grams, not kilograms. And that riders dare to let go of the reins during their riding lessons. It is not about having un-taut reins but to reduce the tension in the muscle chain belonging to the arms. If an exercise went well, do it again with half as much effort. It decreases your muscle tension and increases your flexibility.
Quoting Nuno Oliveira "... try to relax your hands to have a lighter contact. I have been lecturing for forty years and this is what I never cease to repeat to students around the world who speak to me about their difficulties."
The control lays not in force but in ease! This insight would certainly be appreciated by a large number of horses.
I think the idea behind EC Hands is good. The pressure may well vary during a riding session and with this you could "see the variation". Another pressure measure tool is made of plastic and breaks when the limit is reached and passed, but it gives no indication of whether you stay too close to the limit all the time you ride.
But even if I like the idea, I can not hold back a sigh - how did they set their scale!? I had to pull quite hard just to reach the green field, I guess that it was at least 1.5 kg. In order then to get me up to the red zone, I really had to put effort in the pull. The plastic pressure measurer has a minimum weight of 2 kg, so my perception of 1.5 may well be 2. Manufacturers often glance at each other to look for guidance.
During the ISES Conference a research project on horses habituation of the pressure of the bridle was presented. The study showed that horses were not accustomed to the pressure, but tried to avoid it. The maximum pressure they put on the reins once (and never again) was 1 kg, then they exposed themselves to about 600 g.
My reins including a 12.5 cm bridong bit weighs 394 g. To that weight in the horse's mouth I can add up to 200 g and land on a pressure that a horse might accept.
There are research done in the U.S. showing that bit damages horses' mouths. The scale ranges from micro-fracture on the bars to fully visible dental damages.
I have not taken a stand against bits. But I definitely react to how the bit is used and what is considered acceptable in today's riding regarding what riders do with bits and reins.
Therefore, I wish and hope that the producers of "pressure gadgets" dare to adjust their scales so that they begin with grams, not kilograms. And that riders dare to let go of the reins during their riding lessons. It is not about having un-taut reins but to reduce the tension in the muscle chain belonging to the arms. If an exercise went well, do it again with half as much effort. It decreases your muscle tension and increases your flexibility.
Quoting Nuno Oliveira "... try to relax your hands to have a lighter contact. I have been lecturing for forty years and this is what I never cease to repeat to students around the world who speak to me about their difficulties."
The control lays not in force but in ease! This insight would certainly be appreciated by a large number of horses.
Wednesday 1 December 2010
Science: comparison of methods for training
This is a study which I find very interesting. Scientists have compared two different methods for starting 28 horses. While the horses where trained to accept saddle, bridle and rider the scientists monitored the level of stress experienced by the horses. After 5 weeks all the horses demonstrated their newly acquired skills by performing a simple dressage test.
The scientists came to the conclusion that although the horses' level of stress and thus their experiences differ due to the method, the technical performance at the dressage test were not affected. Thus one can use a method that the horse will find less stressful without compromising the technical performance.
Conventional horsemanship
The two methods that were used was a conventional method for starting horses and what in this study was called “sympathetic horsemanship”: The conventional method was based on Steinbrecht's system for starting horses.
This means that the horses where trained according to a pre-defined program. This included longing, first without and later with bridle and saddle during the first week. The second week the horses were backed, first while being longed. At the end of the first week the horses were ridden in walk and trot. The continued work focused on the outline and rhythm of the horse.
Sympathetic horsemanship
”Sympathetic horsemanship” means that every signal was first taught separately and then introduced together. The training program was made to fit each individual horse's progress. The method included ground work, yielding to pressure and de-spooking to objects and events. The horses were first introduced to the rider and after that to a bareback-pad and later a bit made of leather.
Less stress during the training period
The results show among other things that the horses trained with ”sympathetic horsemanship” showed lower levels of stress during the training period. This means that these horses, compared to the ones trained with the conventional method, showed a more relaxed body language with a lower head position and lower heart rate.
No visual difference, but measurable
What I find very interesting is that at the dressage test at the end of the test period, there were no differences whatsoever between the technical performances of the horses trained with the two different methods. The horses where ridden in all three gaits. Neither were there any differences in behaviour between the two different groups. But the horses trained with the conventional method showed a higher heart rate.
Official conclusion
The scientists in the study draw the conclusion that the horses experience the two methods differently but that the technical performance in spite of this was not affected. Thus one can use a method that the horse will find less stressful without compromising the technical performance.
My conclusion
I draw the conclusion that horses are extremely forgiving animals that always do their best even during less than optimal circumstances. That is why the official and conventional methods are still practised.
Reference
”A comparison of sympathetic and conventional training methods on responses to initial horse training” by Visser, K; VanDierendonck, M; Ellis, A; Rijksen, C. & Van Reenen, C. Publicerad 2009 in “The Veterinary Journal”.
PS Thank you to Mark Stanton of Natural Horsemanship magazine for proof reading!
The scientists came to the conclusion that although the horses' level of stress and thus their experiences differ due to the method, the technical performance at the dressage test were not affected. Thus one can use a method that the horse will find less stressful without compromising the technical performance.
Conventional horsemanship
The two methods that were used was a conventional method for starting horses and what in this study was called “sympathetic horsemanship”: The conventional method was based on Steinbrecht's system for starting horses.
This means that the horses where trained according to a pre-defined program. This included longing, first without and later with bridle and saddle during the first week. The second week the horses were backed, first while being longed. At the end of the first week the horses were ridden in walk and trot. The continued work focused on the outline and rhythm of the horse.
Sympathetic horsemanship
”Sympathetic horsemanship” means that every signal was first taught separately and then introduced together. The training program was made to fit each individual horse's progress. The method included ground work, yielding to pressure and de-spooking to objects and events. The horses were first introduced to the rider and after that to a bareback-pad and later a bit made of leather.
Less stress during the training period
The results show among other things that the horses trained with ”sympathetic horsemanship” showed lower levels of stress during the training period. This means that these horses, compared to the ones trained with the conventional method, showed a more relaxed body language with a lower head position and lower heart rate.
No visual difference, but measurable
What I find very interesting is that at the dressage test at the end of the test period, there were no differences whatsoever between the technical performances of the horses trained with the two different methods. The horses where ridden in all three gaits. Neither were there any differences in behaviour between the two different groups. But the horses trained with the conventional method showed a higher heart rate.
Official conclusion
The scientists in the study draw the conclusion that the horses experience the two methods differently but that the technical performance in spite of this was not affected. Thus one can use a method that the horse will find less stressful without compromising the technical performance.
My conclusion
I draw the conclusion that horses are extremely forgiving animals that always do their best even during less than optimal circumstances. That is why the official and conventional methods are still practised.
Reference
”A comparison of sympathetic and conventional training methods on responses to initial horse training” by Visser, K; VanDierendonck, M; Ellis, A; Rijksen, C. & Van Reenen, C. Publicerad 2009 in “The Veterinary Journal”.
PS Thank you to Mark Stanton of Natural Horsemanship magazine for proof reading!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
