The old dead guys

[Trudi]

This is a subject that has been niggling away in my head for a long time  probably since I started to train in what is known as a classical manner  I've read Baucher, Beudant, Podhajsky and lots of the other 'old dead guys' or odg's as the classical crowd like to refer to them  to be truly honest I've probably forgotten more than I retained but hey I've put in the hours  (yes I know Lippa, loser).

Now if we make allowances for historical/cultural/breed differences we can use much of the good advice the odg's offer but my own dilemma is which bits do we exclude and which do we include? At the moment I'm wading through William Cavendish  (it's in ye old frenche and très difficile pour une anglaise) and I read things that would be totally at home in modern day thoughtful gymnastic training manuals, I also read some not so acceptable stuff about spurs, working in pillars with young horses etc etc and see some truly awful rollkur like drawings of his 'methods' in action with tight side reins and massive bits for riding. It's the same with Pluvinel, Baucher and others.

So, get to the point, where do you draw the line between history and today? Is it very valid (if we pick out the bits we like  ) or is it so far apart that we should just enjoy it as a history lesson and no more?

[Heather]

Well Newcastle was famously wicked to his poor wife, so have my suspicions that his horses probably didnt fare any better, Trudi!

But I think it essential for any serious horseman or woman to read the ODGs- how much we take on board of their training methods, I think we have to judge by what feels right and ethical in our own conscience.

[issywizz]

I thought you just read it to sound good and put people down on the net? 

[intouch]

I've got Sidney Galvayne's 20th Century Book of the Horse but I wouldn't put everything he recommends into practice!
But it was seeing Podhajsky in person many years ago that made me realise that what the BHS was teaching me wasn't the way I wanted to go - he was magic, so quiet and confident, and the horses he rode (belonging to Mrs VDS Williams) just melted for him.  So long as anything I learn doesn't disagree in principle with his teachings, it's OK by me. 
The others I'm happy to learn about 2nd hand!

[Claire]

Chapter 17 of Racinet's "fallacies" is probably in point ...

[Peaches]

Need it really be all that different than deciding what we do and don't follow today? There's plenty methods we are willing to take ideas from, and plenty that we aren't, plenty well known horsemen we might 'follow' and plenty we might not - and for each person those boundaries would lie slightly differently. I'm not sure that just because they've been and gone, they need to be either taken as gospel, nor as history only, any more so than any wellknown name or method now.

[Trudi]

Well Newcastle was famously wicked to his poor wife, so have my suspicions that his horses probably didnt fare any better, Trudi!

My thoughts exactly Heather and tbh it rather puts me off him (and others of a similar ilk) parts of his book are so egotistical where he rambles on about how the odg's who went before him were erroneous in their methods, just like today really 

I thought you just read it to sound good and put people down on the net? 

LOL I don't know how to put folks down with a quote from the odg's but I know some on the CD list who do  trouble is if you read a list of 'quotables' from these famous ecuyers then they all sound such kind, thoughtful men but in truth they likely weren't    and for me it colours my feelings (even if it shouldn't).

Need it really be all that different than deciding what we do and don't follow today? There's plenty methods we are willing to take ideas from, and plenty that we aren't, plenty well known horsemen we might 'follow' and plenty we might not - and for each person those boundaries would lie slightly differently. I'm not sure that just because they've been and gone, they need to be either taken as gospel, nor as history only, any more so than any wellknown name or method now.

No, agreed Alex, although I don't think I take any advice from any author unless it backs up in the practical sense when I'm riding, so old and dead or young and alive makes no difference. I suppose what niggles is that the bods that IW alludes to are oft quoting the odg's as if we SHOULD all bow down and take them at their word and I was just interested to see what others thought. Quite a few bloggers (not on EE) I read have quotes up that, standing alone, are quite honourable but taken in the context of the author's lifestyle/treatment of horses are perhaps less honourable.

I've got Sidney Galvayne's 20th Century Book of the Horse but I wouldn't put everything he recommends into practice!
But it was seeing Podhajsky in person many years ago that made me realise that what the BHS was teaching me wasn't the way I wanted to go - he was magic, so quiet and confident, and the horses he rode (belonging to Mrs VDS Williams) just melted for him.  So long as anything I learn doesn't disagree in principle with his teachings, it's OK by me. 
The others I'm happy to learn about 2nd hand!

Yes intouch, Podhajsky is probably not really an odg (well I know technically he is) and was a bad example for me to use, whilst I don't personally follow all his training methods there is nothing that I could dislike about them 

This has partly risen to the top of my thoughts again as I'm reading PK's book about training Odin, it's an old book but, I think, newly printed in English and he has added a note that the book was based on his thinking at the time of writing which has since changed. Perhaps the odg's would change their thoughts if they were around today.

I'm just thinking what fun it would be to have a bunch of them for dinner and really find out what they were thinking 

[issywizz]

I think one of the biggest problems is that mostly their whole ethos would not be something that you or I would want to adopt Trudi.
What I feel most strongly from reading most of the bits I have read is that they were actually pretty tough on the horses and had a manner towards them that personally I would want nothing to do with-even the ones who are often quoted as being kind etc.
Another issue is that they certainly didnt have the knowledge of biomechanics that we have available today.
Does this mean we should disregard everything they had to say?
No,just pick out the bits you like 

[ukica]

I think one of the biggest problems is that mostly their whole ethos would not be something that you or I would want to adopt Trudi.
What I feel most strongly from reading most of the bits I have read is that they were actually pretty tough on the horses and had a manner towards them that personally I would want nothing to do with-even the ones who are often quoted as being kind etc.
Another issue is that they certainly didnt have the knowledge of biomechanics that we have available today.
Does this mean we should disregard everything they had to say?
No,just pick out the bits you like 

Exactly 

[Claire]

Perhaps the odg's would change their thoughts if they were around today.

probably - we all do, as we go on through life, and as you said we've more science based knowledge now as well....

I'm just thinking what fun it would be to have a bunch of them for dinner and really find out what they were thinking 

that WOULD be good!

[Nettie]

How strange. A thought randomly popped into my head this afternoon and then I see this thread which sort of connects .

If someone had a time-machine and was able to travel back in time and actually photograph/video the Old Masters riding, then on their return to now, posted them for public consumption what would the response be? Would they be lorded as brilliant or torn to shreads if it was not made clear who the subjects were? Would we be shocked (not because of the feat of time travel) to to be informed as to who they were?

The only images we have today of old dead guys are subject to artistic impression, so did they look in real life like they do in their engravings?

For example Xenophon writes in depth about the correct classical seat, a position still aspired to two and a half thousand years later, but look at Classical Greek sculptures of young men on horseback, they look like chair seats to my eye . Maybe artists of that day thought it looked better, or perhaps bad instruction and saddle design is not new  


William Cavendish Duke of Newcastle is famous for inventing draw reins

A true horseman/woman listens to his/her horse, try follow the bits your mount agrees with

[Trudi]

  that was one of the things that struck me too Nettie especially after I read Baucher, he was ridiculed for his appalling position and yet the paintings of him in the book show a slim, graceful chap sat in balance, not even a chair seat in sight  doesn't really stack up does it  I think artistic impression and massive egos had a lot to answer for!

[ukica]

Perhaps the artists and sculptures had the *real* knowledge 

[Nettie]

But I think it essential for any serious horseman or woman to read the ODGs- how much we take on board of their training methods, I think we have to judge by what feels right and ethical in our own conscience.

Wise words

[Nettie]

Perhaps the artists and sculptures had the *real* knowledge 

There is an old saying "Never a truer word spoken in jest"