By Barbara Ellin Fox

Federico Caprilli’s Forward System had an impact on jumping worldwide. (check out my article “Backwards and Forwards: The Evolution of Jumping“)  His methods were adapted in different ways  to suit the riding needs in various countries.  Caprilli’s student, Piero Santini, indicated that  the Cavalry School at Fort Riley had made the fewest changes and was closest to the Italian system.  (In reality the system used a Fort Riley was a combination of the Italian and French methods. )  Caprilli believed that the horse should be allowed to travel and jump as naturally as possible and that it was the rider’s responsibility to impede the horse as little as possible.

Federico Caprilli

Today we see riders sitting behind the motion, driving the horse toward the fence with an aggressive seat, as if they could cause a reluctant horse to become brilliant.  We see riders in various contortions over the fence. And we see every sort of bit and device used because riders go from much contact to no contact and back to contact, during their ride over a course, losing steady communication with the horse.  Where has Caprilli gone?

It was refreshing to read “Master the Principles of Jumping” by Sandra Oliynk in the April ’10 issue of Practical Horseman magazine, that George Morris is teaching some of Caprilli’s principles.

The article is written from the 2010 Horsemanship Training Session. It starts with cavaletti work.

Quote, page 35:  “He wanted the riders in galloping positions with their upper bodies 30 degrees in front of the vertical to help them stay with their horses’ motion. “Rodrigo Pessoa and Eric Lamaze are very light in their seats, very forward, very accommodating to the horse, so the horses can use their backs,” he explained of the two Olympic show-jumping gold medalists. Other than that, he wanted the riders to do very little: “Don’t push, don’t pull. Sit still,” he said, adding, “When riding cavaletti, you need to have a very oscillating arm. I see a lot of tight reins and tight necks. Your horse needs a long neck. His neck is his balancing agent.”

Caprilli would have been pleased that riders were instructed to ride in a forward position to accommodate the horse.  He also would have applauded to Morris for telling riders to sit still and do very little.  Even more important to Caprilli was the use of the riders hand, as you can see from this quote (pg. 36) from the Caprilli Papers:

“If we jump without yielding the hand and without accompanying with the body the forward thrust of the centre of gravity, the horse, in his discomfort, retaliates by ‘bucking’ over the obstacle, which causes violent and painful strain and requires an effort much superior to the normal.”

“In conclusion, I wish to express my firm belief in the fact that yielding the hand when in the air is the most important of all movements, and that therefore an instructor should insist on its correct accomplishment more than on any other detail.”

The Practical Horseman article progressed from cavaletti to bending lines.  Quote, page 37, “Once the riders saw their distances to the jumps, George told them to focus on turning using inside opening reins to lead their horses. “This is supple, this is soft. You can see suppling the horse has nothing to do with gadgets. It has to do with aids. It doesn’t have anything to do with tying the poor horse’s head down.””

From “Caprilli Papers, page 20 “…the first rule of good horsemanship should be that of reducing, simplifying and even, when possible, altogether eliminating any action on the rider’s part.”

And “The simple use of the hands in turning a horse, and of the legs to make him advance with the required determination and purpose, are sufficient aids. If we moreover bring them into play at the right moment and without unnecessary vigour, we shall be superlatively successful.”

“In riding, to intervene by pulling is easy but very often harmful; it is, on the other hand, very difficult, but always right, not to interfere with the horse and to know how to yield to him under all conditions and in every circumstance. This is what we must both learn and teach. If we are capable of yielding the hand, we shall know when, and in what measure, to pull.”

George Morris

Practical Horseman, page 37 “Though turning, the horses still had to be forward, and the riders still had to be in galloping positions. George didn’t want the riders to slow down and sit. “To make a short turn, let the horse gallop under your seat. The horse is free,” he said. “This excessive sitting down doesn’t soften the horse.”

And page 40 of Practical Horseman Magazine:
“As the riders galloped the two jumps on a figure-eight pattern, George stressed rider position. “Most people who jump ahead of their horses are doing the work of their hands with their upper bodies,” he said. “Don’t jump up your horse’s neck. Keep a soft arm. Let the horse take care of your upper body. Do nothing, nothing, NOTHING with your seat.”

Caprilli advocated for the horse and for less force from the rider. He was a natural horsemanship advocate.  He believed that left to its natural state the horse was relaxed and  capable of making decisions about jumping and that it was the rider’s job to interfere with the horse as little as possible. He believed that trouble began when the rider introduced school movements, deep seats, and collection. Caprilli believed that the rider caused the tension which resulted in pain for the horse and that these things caused fear and opposition.

Kudos to George Morris for teaching these principles in the 2010 Horsemanship Training Session.   It’s too bad that his examples for a rider with a light seat did not include an American.  I chose to include a YouTube video of  Canadian Eric Lamaze  at the beginning of this post. Eric Lamaze is a lighter rider that Pessoa. For my example of an America rider with a light seat I’ve included a video of  Kathy Kusner on Aberali and Untouchable .  It’s old an not very clear, but for those of us who love to watch riders from that period of history, it’s worth the effort. Thanks to Ron Kobrine for putting this footage on Youtube. Click the link to view the video of Kathy Kusner:     Kathy Kusner Wiesbaden/Aachen

Thanks for reading U.S. Horsemanship,

Barbara Ellin Fox

Would you like to receive interesting articles from U.S. Horsemanship right in your inbox? Find out about the advantages of signing up to receive the U.S. Horseman Updates by clicking on the subscribe page.  Or you can sign up directly by filling out the form on this page.

And if you’re interested in riding or teaching riding, please visit my other blog, The Riding Instructor at http://theridinginstructor.net/

The video at the beginning of this blog is of Raimondo d’Inzeo at Rome 1952. The d’Inzeo brothers, Raimondo and Piero (pictured) were excellent representatives of the Italian method. Their father was a student of Federico Caprilli who is considered the father of the forward seat system.

There are significant differences between the Italian, the French and the German methods. Like the horses they ride, each is different, serving a separate purpose.  The following description is from  “Riding and Schooling Horses” written by Harry Chamberlin . His description helps us understand why the seat taught at Fort Riley (the Balanced or Military seat) in Chamberlin’s day had to be a hybrid of  the Italian and French methods. I’ve included photos depicting the seats.

Italian or Caprilli Seat- 2nd generation- Piero d'Inzeo

“Briefly, the Italian teachings are to the effect that; first, the horse should be allowed great liberty in the use of his head and neck, and no effort should be exerted, through training, to make him shift more of his weight to the hind quarters* than he naturally carries on them; second, the rider’s weight should be kept well forward over the horse’s shoulders, through inclining the body to the front.

Italian Seat

The Italians, therefore, go to an extreme, in that their horses receive little training to develop suppleness of poll and jaw, or to raise the head and neck in order to make them lightly-balanced1. As they carry much of their own and the rider’s weight on their forehands,’ it would be necessary to completely re-train them for use as polo ponies, or to bring out any of the brilliance and handiness which is developed by suppling the poll and jaw, and raising the head and neck. The latter training shifts a larger proportion of the horse’s weight to the hind quarters when at the slow gaits, turning quickly, or slowing down and halting. It produces a more clever and pleasant horse to ride; if it is properly done.

French Seat - Maj. de la Doucette - Cadre Noir

For more than a hundred years, the French School for Cavalry officers at Saumur has been world-famous. Its seat has not gone to the extremes in forward inclination of the body and shortness of stirrup-straps that are found- in that of the Italian School. French horses receive far more schooling for the purpose of producing suppleness, brilliance, and handiness. When trained by good riders, they have delightful manners. In general, however, these horses, like so many of our own, in the Army and out, are over-bitted and poorly ridden. As a result, their necks are too much arched and over-flexed, with the attendant evils, to be described later. It is undoubtedly true that, except when executed by expert riders, too much collection and schooling are more apt to ruin a horse entirely, than are too little. As in the case of so many other things, the middle course in training seems the safest, soundest, and surest.

The Italian seat is, perhaps, for most horsemen, a little too radical, in that the stirrup-straps are always exceedingly short, and as will be shown later, the shorter the stirrup-strap, the greater must be the inclination of the body to the front, in order to ride in balance. On the other hand, the French seat, which is apparently being modified in the direction of the Italian one, especially for jumping, still resembles somewhat that of the classic haute ecole.” The Swedish and German Schools correctly believe in long and thorough schooling, but teach the horse to take a very firm support on his bit. Their seats are not generally as far forward as the Italian one, nor are they, in consequence, as conducive to comfort and freedom for the horse. For jumping and cross-country riding, the Italians undoubtedly have the correct principles regarding the seat, but as regards principles of training and schooling the horse, those of the French are equal to, if not better than any others in the world. In the United States, a great many of our foremost riders in the Cavalry are following a system of training and riding which has sought to extract the best from all the foreign schools, and have added thereto the elements of value discovered here in the United States.

In every country abroad, the military riders, as a whole, are outstanding as compared to civilians. This is only natural, since normally the officers ride habitually in their profession, and also for years have received the benefit of scientific instruction at the Cavalry schools. Certain countries, — Belgium, Poland, Holland, Rumania, and others, — have their own schools, and their little differences in type of seat, as well as system of training. However, for the most part all have followed the teachings of the French, Italians, or Germans. Credit is entirely due to Italy for the forward seat, which, with modifications, will assuredly become universal, as its merit is indisputable as far as the basic principles upon which it is founded are concerned. There are doubtlessly certain changes which can be profitably made, notably in the length of stirrup to be used, except when jumping.’

Would you like to receive interesting articles from U.S. Horsemanship right in your inbox? Find out about the advantages of signing up to receive the U.S. Horseman Updates by clicking on the subscribe page.  Or you can sign up directly by filling out the form on this page.

And if you’re interested in riding or teaching riding, please visit my other blog, The Riding Instructor at http://theridinginstructor.net/

by Barbara Ellin Fox

I’m frequently asked about the differences between seats and systems of riding.  One question is sort of like the “chicken or the egg’.  Is Balanced Seat the result of a dressage seat with forward seat added to it? Or is it the result of forward seat with dressage added to it? My personal experience is the latter.

Capt. Federico Caprilli

I wish I could ask Harry Chamberlin himself, but in his absence he’s left us with the following description in “Riding and Schooling Horses”: “For the Seat advocated, the writer is principally indebted to the Italian Cavalry School at Tor di Quinto. The Italians were the pioneers in riding the forward seat during cross-country work and jumping. However, the teachings of the French and American Cavalry Schools, modified to some extent by observation of the best horsemen among the Germans, Swedes, and Poles, have entered into the conception of the Seat described. Much personal experience has convinced the writer of its practical superiority.”

When writing about La Gueriniere, Baucher and D’Aure, Chamberlin adds,
“These teachings, but little altered, and used for generations at the French Cavalry School at Saumur, have been adopted” almost in toto by the American Cavalry School at Fort Riley, Kansas. There is nothing better in the world concerning the training and schooling of the horse. The instruction received at Saumur and Fort Riley, and found in the works of the great masters, provides the basis for all that pertains to the Aids and Training in this book.”

So there you have it: The Chicken or the Egg.

Now for my simplest  answer. The freedom of the horse’s head and neck, free forward movement, forward balance, shorter stirrups, and forward position over the jumps are from Caprilli. These are the things that took jumping from the backward seat to the forward seat.  The use of seat, use of leg aids, flexion, bending, lateral movements, balancing of the horse and flexions of the pole and jaw are from classical training or dressage.

Col. Paul Rodzianko jumping without reins

There have been many changes to the forward seat as Caprilli offered it.  The  addition and adaptations from other countries , such as those mentioned by Chamberlin are one example. Even Russian Capt. Paul Rodzianko combined the teachings of Caprilli and Fillis.  Rodzianko was a student of both masters. After leaving Russian Rodziank was instructor for the Irish Free State Cavalry. Vladmir Littauer, also from Russia, immigrated to America and had his own version of the forward seat. Littauer was not a direct student of Caprilli. Italian, Captain Piero Santini was the closest “follower” of Caprilli.  As a student of Caprilli, he authored several books that expound and expand on Caprilli’s notes. In “Riding Reflections” Santini writes, “Fort Riley is very near Italy in spite of the 4000 miles that divide them….”

Would you like to receive interesting articles from U.S. Horsemanship right in your inbox?? Find out about the advantages of signing up to receive the U.S. Horseman Updates by clicking on the subscribe page.  Or you can sign up directly by filling out the form on this page.

And if you’re interested in riding or teaching riding, please visit my other blog, The Riding Instructor at http://theridinginstructor.net/

by Barbara Ellin Fox

“The correct principles of equitation and horse training are in themselves simple and well defined, and easily within the comprehension of any intelligent mind. Unfortunately, these principles are so difficult to find in the mass of literature on equestrian subjects, and often so intermingled with inaccurate and abstruse statements, that the most earnest student in his search for them is frequently discouraged.

Moreover, the precepts set forth by some of the most able authors of former times, are so tersely expressed, and presuppose so much equestrian knowledge, that their full meaning and importance are difficult to grasp unless the reader has had much practical experience. Oftentimes instructors, through limited knowledge or inability to make their instruction understood, teach their students little. Though the instructors are painstaking, and the written word is available, students, despite their zeal, finish their courses with many misconceptions, and only a vague knowledge concerning the horse and riding.

Equitation is not mysterious, either in theory or in practice. A good horseman requires a normally alert mind, with an analytical turn, which always asks “why” and “how” about the horse and his training. He needs only an average physique, which can soon be coordinated by his alert mind and regular practice at riding. No great strength or other remarkable physical attributes are necessary.

One of the good ones, Robert Taylor, MFH

In addition, he should possess a theoretical knowledge of training and the use of the aids, along with a correct conception of the seat, and how to ride it.”

These are the first 4 paragraphs in the preface of  “Riding and Schooling Horses” printed in 1935. According to the author, Lt. Col. Harry D. Chamberlin, the qualities that a person needs in order to become a good horseman are:

• a normally alert mind
• a mind with an analytical turn asking “how” and “why”
• average physique
• regular practice
• theoretical knowledge

Harry Chamberlin obviously had these characteristics and more.  A West Point graduate, he also graduated from the cavalry School at Fort Riley, Ks.,   as well as Saumur, France and Tor di Quinto, Italy. He was an instructor at Fort Riley and West point and a member of the Army Olympic teams in 1920, ’28, and ‘32.  (A good biography of Harry Chamberlin written by Lou Di Marco is located at http://www.militaryhorse.org/features/dimarco/hdc.php )

As an instructor at Fort Riley, Chamberlin would have run across many differing types of physique and minds.  He would also have seen the results of lots of practice. Consequently I think we can believe him when he implies that the average person with a questioning mind who is willing to apply themselves, can become a good horseman.

Harry Chamberlin points out the importance of developing a theoretical understanding of horsemanship. Col Chamberlin studied the works of Baucher, La Guerinere, and D’ Aure  as well as many of the other books that were available on horsemanship at the time.  Many of the more current books contain a lot of error that stems from misunderstanding horsemanship.  And I would add that the classics on horsemanship which have been translated are more difficult for the average American to read, than a work that is originally written in English.

Future Good Horsewoman

I can believe that this lack of basic, clear cut writing, combined with less than satisfactory results between instructors and students, with a healthy dose of Chamberlin’s passion for the sport added, were the catalyst for writing “Riding and Schooling Horses”.  That he wanted the instructions to be easy to understand is obvious when, later in the preface he points out that “ every page of the manuscript was submitted to an inexperienced horsewoman, in order to ascertain whether she could understand every point in the book, and could put each step into practice. In any case where she was unable to follow the book in theory or in practice, that part was rewritten until it was entirely clear.”

So the next time someone wants you to think that you have to be a certain shape or size to ride, or that you must have tremendous technical skill to train , or great intellect to understand the deep truths of equitation or dressage, remember Harry Chamberlin.   He was the best and he said the average intelligent person could become a good horseman.  What more can you ask for?  I think I’ll stick with Harry Chamberlin.

Would you like to receive interesting articles from U.S. Horsemanship right in your inbox? Find out about the advantages of signing up to receive the U.S. Horseman Updates by clicking on the subscribe page.  Or you can sign up directly by filling out the form on this page.

And if you’re interested in riding or teaching riding, please visit my other blog, The Riding Instructor at http://theridinginstructor.net/

In 1938 when Capt. Littauer first told riders to “…support(ing) yourself with your hands laid on the horse’s neck.”, he was addressing riders who were beginning to jump.  He encouraged riders to support themselves in this way because, he says, to do other wise “requires a very athletic body and constant daily practice”.  Obviously he was speaking of the casual rider at the beginning stages of learning to jump. (For more  check out my blogs ” Evolution of the Crest Release” and “Forwards and Backwards”.)

When Gordon Wright published “Learning to Ride, Hunt, and Show” in 1950 he instructed the elementary level rider to put the weight of his upper body on his hands and on the horse’s neck.  He continued this for the intermediate rider. In addressing the advanced rider he says (pg 99) “The rider’s position in the saddle, smoothness with which his hands and upper body function, are all dependent on his security. Final and real security can not be achieved until the heels are down and the rider’s weight is actually carried in the heels. For that reason, the learner and the intermediate rider both are cautioned against trying to jump out of hand before this final security has been achieved, and the shock absorbers are able and ready to go to work for them.”

Mr. Wright continues, “But jumping out of hand is the goal toward which we are steadily and constantly working in everything we do, because jumping out of hand permits  the maximum security and control over the horse. It enables the rider to ride a course of jumps without wings with much less danger of run outs than if the hands must be brought up three strides away from the fence. It means the rider can now attempt more difficult horses, because he is able to use all of his aids in controlling his horse. It is, of course, the  only way to train or jump horses that refuse or run out.”

And Mr. Wright went on to say, ” But this ideal form of jumping is certainly something that anyone with the will and the patience to learn  and learn properly can master. It is within the realm of any rider who will resist the temptation to hurry the early work  or jump the bigger fences, before his reactions become automatic, and before he finds his hands moving forward no matter what his horse does or what sudden emergency condition he encounters before a fence.”

When George Morris published “Hunter Seat Equitation” 20 years later, I don’t think he intended to develop generations of riders who were dependent on supporting their upper body with their hands in order to jump at all levels of riding. But it happened – an unintended consequence. Today we see  ALL levels of hunter jumper riders leaning on their hands for support over all sizes of jumps.

An over dependency on the use of the crest release has created an epidemic of riders who “jump ahead of their horses”, “stand in their stirrups”, “duck” or “lay” over fences. This, in turn, undermines the riders’ base of support and has created a huge burden for the horse.

In  September 2009 issue of  Practical Horseman’s “Jumping Clinic with George Morris”, Mr Morris gives us a definition of  “jumping ahead of the horse” He says of rider # 1,  “Her nearly vertical thigh indicates that she is standing in her stirrups, ahead of her horse’s motion, instead of crouching above him in balance.”

The video “The Effects of the Crest Release” shows examples of “standing”. “jumping ahead”, “laying on the horse” and “ducking”.  You can compare these riding faults, for yourself, with pictures of riders in the video who don’t use the crest release.

How do riding faults such as “standing”, “jumping ahead”, “laying on the horse” and “ducking” effect the horse? Is there a place for the crest release in modern U.S. Horsemanship? Or is the crest release an abomination that was thrust upon American riders resulting in the ruination of good horsemanship? I hope you’ll continue to follow the U.S. Horsemanship blog while I discover answers to these questions.

by Barbara Ellin Fox

In my blog titled, “What Do You Base Your  Support On?”,  I showed you why, Mr. Morris’ definition of the base of support  is only part of the truth. In this blog I’ll show you why seat and thighs are inadequate as a base of support and how riders have compensated for it.

What happens when we follow Mr. Morris’ definition of base of support to it’s logical conclusion?  To reiterate,  Mr. Morris’ definition of base of support is “seat and thighs”. We have seen photos of average riders, particularly ones of horse and rider jumping higher fences, that the seat and thigh are not in contact with the saddle. And we have seen  that the rider,s lower leg (which is in contact with the horse) and stirrup, are providing them some support during the jump.

But is that all? Is there anything else that’s supporting these riders?

For variety I’ve added photos of more riders.  I invite you to look at these and the photos from my other blogs for comparison.  And in case you feel like I’m “stacking the deck” for the purpose of my point of view, surf the net for photos from shows, look for photos of show results in magazines like the Chronicle of the Horse and draw your own conclusions. But I think you’ll agree that it doesn’t take a highly educated eye to see that all these riders are being supported by another body part, namely the hands and sometimes their arms.

A quick investigation into other types of riding reveals that the seat taught for hunter/jumper riding is the only one that teaches riders to support themselves by pressing their hands, arms or upper body into the horse’s neck.  One could argue that this is necessary because they horse and riders jump so high, but then I would ask you to view the video on my July 13 post “Huaso Sets the World Record” and you will see that leaning on the horse’s neck was not necessary to break the world’s record for high jump at 8’1 1/2″.  Or look the video I’ve included in this blog. And for really excellent photos of our great Olympians, check out the illustrations in William Steinkraus’ book, “Riding and Jumping”. None of these riders needed to “lean” on their horse with their hands or arms,  for support.

What has happened to change the way we support ourselves on a hunter or jumper in America and was this change necessary? Check the future U.S. Horsemanship blogs while I explore this timely and sometimes testy topic.

by Barbara Ellin Fox

A Recap

In my last blog I showed you how the Base of Support has evolved from Fort Riley to the current Hunter Seat trend. This blog will explain why “Base of Support” as defined by the legendary teacher, George Morris, is only a part of the truth on the flat and over fences.

To refresh our memory, the 1935 “Cavalry Manual of Horsemanship and Horsemastership”, vol. 1 defines the base of support as “The base of support is formed by those parts of the rider’s body in contact with the saddle and horse, from the points of the pelvic bones down along the inside of the thighs, to and including the knees, legs, and stirrups.”

In his “Hunter Seat Equitation”, George Morris defines base of support as the thighs and seat, omitting the knee, leg, and stirrup from the Cavalry Manual definition.

The Proof is in the Pudding

I believe it is more beneficial to the development of riding to look at what is being produced in the average rider, as opposed to analyzing at a few exceptional riders to conclude what is happening in horsemanship. Looking at the average rider shows us what is being taught, learned and used, and how theory and definitions effect the many riders who are striving for success. The average rider is compiled in the above photo of six jumps taken at a recent Grand Prix competition. And as a matter of record, these Grand Prix jumps were higher than equitation fences, all of these riders finished the course without falling off and one of these riders is the likely winner of the event.

In his book “Riding and Schooling Horses”, Harry Chamberlin shows how the area covered by the base of support becomes less as the rider goes from the full seat into the more forward jumping seat, which we currently call 2 point.

the above pictures show that during the jumping phase, the average rider no longer uses his seat and thighs in 2 point and that the lower leg from just above the knee through the foot becomes the rider’s base of support. This occurs by necessity.

A General Definition

A quick Internet search for “base of support” produced the following :”The region bounded by body parts in contact with a support surface or surfaces, such as the ground that exerts a counterforce against the body’s applied force.” In the case of the of our jumping riders in the above photo the base of support during jumping is the knee, calf and foot in the stirrup. According to Mr. Morris’s definition of base of support being the thighs and seat, the riders in the photo have no base of support at all because their thighs and seats are not in contact with anything. Logic says that, according to Mr. Morris’s definition, they are no longer supported on their horse.

We’ve Gotta Have It

Using the correct definition needs to be given top priority when it comes to passing information on to a new generation or else we will lose all recognition of sound principles of horsemanship.

Logic says that a rider must have a base of support over a jump. If the seat and thigh are no longer in contact with the saddle or horse they can no longer be the base of support. Following Mr. Morris’ definition, what then becomes the base of support over jumps?

Blast From the Past

In my  blog, “Backwards and Forwards: The Evolution of Jumping”, I mentioned that the modern “riders are encouraged to support their upper body via their hands on the horse’s “crest” .” And in my The Evolution of the Crest Release” I included this excerpt from V.S. Littauer’s “More About Forward Riding” published in 1938. On Page 60, Littauer states, “As long as keeping a firm position, while having the hands in the air, requires a very athletic body and constant daily practice, I would suggest that you help yourself remain in balance by supporting yourself with your hands laid on the horse’s neck.”

Has the base of support been diverted from the Cavalry definition of, “The base of support is formed by those parts of the rider’s body in contact with the saddle and horse, from the points of the pelvic bones down along the inside of the thighs, to and including the knees, legs, and stirrups.” to that of the seat and thighs and HANDS?

mmmm, Where is this Going?

As I have mentioned in the past, jumping horsemanship has evolved a great deal since 1900 and much of it has been very good for the horse, but what of our current situation? Does the average rider or average instructor understand what they are doing and teaching? Has the most recent evolution been beneficial? How has it benefited the stability of the rider over fences? And has it been beneficial to the horse?

I’ll explore some of these questions in future blogs.

by Barbara Ellin Fox

It doesn’t take much to change a foundational teaching on horsemanship. Make a small omission, teach a slightly different definition, distort a concept or tool; and then pass it on to the current generation, and horsemanship evolves.

Mean No Harm
The study of horsemanship at the Fort Riley Cavalry School was based on the theories of riding from the French Cavalry School, the Italian (Caprilli) method, and other European Schools. The Fort Riley Cavalry School became a think tank that caused a purposeful evolution of jumping horsemanship in America has been hugely beneficial to the modern horseman. Further evolution of horsemanship is unavoidable as the purpose for the horse changes, alongside the interest of equestrians. But sometimes evolution that is intended to be helpful, such as the crest release, has unforeseen harmful effects.

Definition is Important
Directly connected to all good horsemanship is the definition of the base of support. The understanding and development of a good base of support in the jumping venues directly influences the rider’s balance, and consequently their ability to be in balance with the horse over fences. It also effects the type of release a rider will use during jumping.

Since the days of the Fort Riley Cavalry School, the definition of the base of support has undergone changes, helping to create a symbiotic need for the crest release.

The 1935 “Cavalry Manual of Horsemanship and Horsemastership”, vol. 1 defines the base of support on page 4. “The base of support is formed by those parts of the rider’s body in contact with the saddle and horse, from the points of the pelvic bones down along the inside of the thighs, to and including the knees, legs, and stirrups.”

This description of base of support is in agreement with the writings of Lt. Col. Harry D. Chamberlin in “Riding and Schooling Horses”, 1934, and seems to have been the consensus in other writings of this time, such as, “Riding, the Balanced Seat”, by Benjamin Lewis, 1936.

1st Change
In 1950 we encounter a change when former Cavalry instructor, Gordon Wright, omits the stirrup as part of the base or base of support in his book “Learning to Ride, Hunt and Show”, (page 14). Later in his version of the “Cavalry Manual of Horsemanship and Horsemastership” 1961, Wright changes the Cavalry’s definition of the base of support. He writes,pg. 23, “(b) the base of support is formed by those parts of the rider’s body in contact with the saddle and the horse, from the points of the buttocks down along the inside of the thighs, to and including the inner knees and legs.” Wright changes the Cavalry’s ‘point of pelvic bones’ to point of buttock (which is not the same thing) and he omits the stirrups from the Cavalry’s description.

More Change
In 1971,l Gordon Wright’s protege’, George Morris made an even larger change to the definition of base of support in his “Hunter Seat Equitation” when he refers ( on page 8 ) to the base of support as the thighs and seat. Not only does Mr. Morris omit the knee, leg, and stirrup from the original definition, he also blurs the points of the pelvic bones into a general term, seat.

As late as March, May and June of 2009, in his monthly “Practical Horseman” column, “Jumping Clinic with George Morris”, Mr. Morris refers to the base of support as being the seat and thigh. He refers to the rider’s base as being “too high out of the saddle” , “behind the horse”, “ahead of the horse”, or “just right”. Certainly by his description , Mr. Morris destroys his own definition of base of support for when it no longer supports the rider it ceases to exist.

Why Didn’t You Say That in the First Place?
Mr. Morris’ April 2009 column in “Practical Horseman”, is titled “The Stirrup as the Foundation”. Here we see that even though Gordon Wright removed the stirrup as part of his definition of the base, George Morris still considers it a foundation. The American Heritage Dictionary’s #2 definition of foundation is, “The basis on which a thing stands, is founded, or is supported.” Or more simply stated “The base of support”.

How Much Did It Cost?
Short cutting any foundational teaching in horsemanship is sure to have its price. In a later blog I’ll show you that the cost for cutting out half of the definition of the base of support in riding, has been an increased dependency on and a validation of the crest release.

by Barbara Ellin Fox

Here’s one for the “military seat”
I was thumbing through the  April ’09 issue of Practical Horseman Magazine and as usual, “The Jumping Clinic” with George Morris provided an interesting view of how hunters are ridden today. You probably know the Jumping Clinic… Mr. Morris reviews photos of four different riders and makes comments on their leg, release, horse and turnout. Once in a great while a picture of an event rider slips in. In this particular issue Mr. Morris awarded the event rider the best form in the class. He said, “This rider shows a classic military-style leg, with her heel way down, toe out 45 degrees and a tight grip through her whole inner leg. While it is not as soft as today’s preferred leg position (with toe out only about 15 degrees), I still like it, and there is no doubt that it is effective and secure.” Mr. Morris further comments that she is “really in balance with her horse”.

The rider is using a bit of a crest release but she is far from laying on her horse with her hands, forearms or upper body like we see so commonly today. The lack of body force driving the horse’s front end into the ground has allowed the horse to jump accurately with nice even knees. The young lady is using her “military seat” for the purpose for which it was intended- riding cross country.

Even though there is way more to the military or balanced seat than heels and toes, (and I’m sure George Morris knows this, too), it’s nice to see elements of the seat functioning the way they were intended AND it’s good to see that George Morris is willing to give credit where credit is due. I believe that even hunt seat riders will benefit from a good look at the military seat principals.

In the words of Paul Simon is balanced seat “slip slidin’ away”?
A second article in the April 2009 Practical Horseman Magazine, left my teeth a little “on edge”. “Dressage for Jumpers” is about the sessions that Robert Dover taught at the 2009 George Morris Horsemastership Training Session. Robert Dover uses the term balanced seat to describe the riding “position” he wanted the riders to assume. Mr. Dover wanted the riders to sit upright as opposed to slightly in front of the vertical and on their buttocks. Mr. Dover says, “Chelsea, sit on your tailbone more…..” And later on to other participants, he says, “You’ve got to be comfortable being back on your rear ends. I don’t know why you think it’s more comfortable on your crotches.” Balanced seat does not include “being comfortable on your rear ends”.

This is not balanced seat. The correct balanced seat never includes sitting on the tailbone. The balanced seat involves the upper body and the base of support. The base of support includes all parts of the rider’s body that are in contact with the saddle and the horse from the points of the pelvic bones to the stirrup. The rider sits on his seat bones and crotch with the fleshy part of the buttocks pushed to the rear. They are not part of the seat. The rider’s upper body is always supposed to remain over its base of support. When the upper body becomes too vertical the rider rides behind the motion of the horse.

The balanced seat in the United States is a product of the US Cavalry School at Fort Riley, namely through the work of Harry D. Chamberlin. The names used for this seat were the military seat, the balanced seat, The Chamberlin seat, and occasionally the forward seat. The balanced seat is not the same as the dressage seat but in one session Mr. Dover took rider the balanced seat to pre Ft Riley days when riders were taught to sit in the deep dressage seat of Fillis and Baucher.

I’m not against anyone learning to ride multiple seats but I am disturbed when the leading professional equestrian icons slur the seats and their definitions together. Our young riders and future instructors need a clear understanding of seats and principals, not a muddied description that is poorly labeled. If we can’t clearly define the different seats we can’t expect the current and future generations of riders to carry on with the solid foundations that have been laid.

Reading the classics on horsemanship, especially on American horsemanship, is essential to good riding, good training and good teaching. In order to teach American riders who have learned American jumping styles an instructor must understand the basic American principals. This is especially important when dressage seat is taught.

If care is not taken to provide clarity in the various seats and styles of riding, the foundations of good riding will be “Slip Slidin’ Away”.

If you would like to read more, check out my thread on the Practical Horseman sit at http://forum.equisearch.com/forums/p/46354/318240.aspx#318240

by Barbara Ellin Fox

In my  post, “Backwards and Forwards” I told you about the earliest publication that I found which indicated the beginning of what would become the crest release. That was V.S. Littauer’s “More About Forward Riding” published in 1938. On Page 60, Littauer states, “As long as keeping a firm position, while having the hands in the air, requires a very athletic body and constant daily practice, I would suggest that you help yourself remain in balance by supporting yourself with your hands laid on the horse’s neck.”

In “Common Sense Horsemanship”, published in 1951, V.S. Littauer continues to teach beginners to place the hands on the crest or hold the mane beginning 3 or 4 strides before the jump. In the same book he has riders move their hands to the sides of the neck as they become better riders.

Other Authors during the ’30s-’40s

There were several other important authors of books on jumping during this same period, including Harry Chamberlin, Capt. Piero Santini, and Benjamin Lewis. None of these authors advocated using the hands to balance or support the rider during jumping. They all advocated what we call the “automatic release” or ‘following hand’ today.

Littauer

Capt. Littauer became a well known riding instructor for the public just as the Cavalry was dismounted in the early 40s. He instructed Jane Marshall Dillon, author of the popular books “School for Young Riders”, published in ’58 and “Form Over Fences” published in ’61. Ms. Dillon advocated that beginners hold the mane, intermediates take support from the sides of the neck and advanced riders “follow through the air” with their hands while jumping. One of Ms. Dillon’s notable students was Olympic Gold Medalist, Joe Fargis, who is actively involved in the ANRC. (http://www.anrc.org/ ). Joe Fargis is the rider in the video posted with this blog.

Military vs the Public

Men Like Federico Caprilli, Piero Santini, and Harry Chamberlin, devoted a major portion of their lives to riding . They had the opportunity to ride for many hours, every day. Chamberlin had a captive audience via the cavalry. Capt. Littauer was a public instructor in New York. He recognized that the majority of people that he taught would never be able to put the hours of practice into their riding that men in the cavalry did, so he began to look for other methods to help them achieve their riding goals. He taught that leaning on the horse’s neck was preferable to jabbing the horse’s mouth, but he still maintained that the goal was to have a following hand.

The dismounting of the Cavalry in 1943 had a huge effect on American riding. Up to that time the U.S. International teams had been made up of Cavalry officers and the School at Ft. Riley had been an Equestrian “think tank”. In its day, the Cavalry School at Fort Riley was the best in the world. After WWII, the public riding community, including horse shows, grew in leaps and bounds.

Author/Instructors of the ’50s

In the ’50s several instructors wrote books that broke riding into levels (beginner, intermediate, advanced). The books describe graduated methods for the use of hands over fences.

In “Horsemastership” (1952) Margaret Cabell Self teaches the use of a neck strap for beginner riders, with the rider grasping a neck strap with the forefinger. The intermediate rider works toward pressing the fingers along the sides of the horse’s neck,

In his 1950 book, “Learning to Ride, Hunt and Show”, Gordon Wright teaches the beginner, who is just learning to trot, to put his hands halfway up the crest, in the mane and to put the weight of his upper body on the hands and the horse’s neck. Gordon Wright teaches that leaning the upper body on the hands is the correct jumping technique for the beginner and intermediate rider, but that advanced riders should strive to “jump out of hand”.

Gordon Wright and Vladamir Littauer were contemporaries, both living in New York . They were both public instructors with students bound for the show ring. It’s not a stretch of the imagination to believe that the two men communicated about teaching methods. Capt. Littauer was known to discuss horsemanship and techniques into the wee hours of the morning. It was his passion.

George Morris

George Morris, student of Gordon Wright, freely admits that he copied his teaching “system” from Gordon Wright. “Hunter Seat Equitation” is a close copy of Wright’s system, but George Morris adds some elaborations. Instead of beginner, intermediate and advanced riders, George Morris labels 3 levels of riding, each characterized with it’s own “release” for jumping.

Mr. Morris teaches First Level riders to grab the mane “halfway up the crest” three or four strides before the jump. He teaches us 3 “technically correct” ways to grab mane. This is called the “long release”. In the revision of “Hunter Seat Equitation” Mr. Morris changed the long release to 1/3-1/2 of the way up the horse’s crest.

Second Level riders should rest their hands firmly on the top of the crest, the last stride or two before the jump. This is the first step toward jumping out of hand. The rider rests the hands on the mane 1/3 of the way up the crest for the “short release”. (pg 110). In the revision of “Hunter Seat Equitation”, Mr. Morris changed the position of the short release to 1-2 inches past the withers.

George Morris teaches the level 3 rider to “jump out of hand” which is synonymous for automatic release.

Evolution

It’s safe to say that the crest release has been an evolving process that grew out of the need for an easier way to teach jumping. None of the authors who supported teaching the crest release in its various forms ever meant for it to become the end all of riding.

George Morris did not create the crest release. He named it.

Finally, in “The American Jumping Style” 1993, the crest release becomes officila when George Morris labels the releases as short crest release, long crest release, automatic release (jumping out of hand).

Friend or Foe? Good or Bad?

The crest release has been a friend to the American rider- or has it? It certainly has made it possible for riders to get into the show ring faster and it has allowed many riders to reach significant levels of competition. But what has it done for the overall quality of horsemanship in the U.S? That will be the subject of a future blog, so please check back with the U.S.Horsemanship blog. And let me know how you feel about the crest release. Please add your comments.