“Animals run no risk of going to hell, they are there already.” (Victor Hugo)

Humans create hell, based on the ludicrous belief that they are the “chosen ones.” Many animals, which are not nocturnal by nature, instead operate at night, avoiding contact with humans. The ones who have been domesticated could teach us to become decent but instead often survive through learned helplessness.

Since the beginning of time, the horse has helped in constructing the material support of human society. Both benefited from partnership, but while the equine furthered his mental capacities as well as sensitivity, humans remained at the level of submissive obedience. Xenophon suggested a degree of willingness, and in each generation, one or a few talented horsepersons have understood in greater depth the horse’s desire. However, even today, the whole philosophy remains at the level of obedience, also if obedience is dressed in apparent kindness.

The advancement of science unravels the sophistication of the equine perception and processing capacities. The one who has not understood the horse’s evolution is the human. In 2002, C. A. Saslow measured the refinement of the horse’s tactile perception in the area under the rider’s leg. The scientist discovered that the horse cans feel pressures that are too light for the human to feel. The horse’s seemingly capacity to “feel our thoughts” is, in fact, his ability to feel subtle and unconscious reactions of our calves in response to our thoughts. Such refined interaction is not directed by obedience but rather by willingness. If we are the “chosen ones,” we have failed lamentably. Our ego did not allow us to benefit from the wisdom that horses and other animals are willing to share.

During a conversation in the forum of the Science of Motion’s online course, Ronda Hanning beautifully summarized how the evolution of knowledge should make us think, versus how traditional thinking makes us believe.  “The horse seeks to align himself (herself) with a reasonable partner. If the rider is that partner, the horse will align with them. If the rider instead interacts through domination (no matter how seemingly gentle), the horse will protect himself through either outright rebellion (not that often) or learned helplessness. Volitional means the horse consciously decides to find a solution. If they do not need to protect, they begin to make changes consciously. This means that we must ride them in such a way as to challenge them to think but not challenge them to protect. It is a fine line, easily overstepped. It is our great fortune that it is inherent in their makeup to be willing. We only need to approach them with that in mind, and we will begin to work with them in such a way that their inherent willingness becomes apparent. If instead, we view them as stubborn, willful, contrary, our actions when we ride will incite protection, and that protection will reinforce our views that horses are inherently unwilling. Our attitude about our horses is a self-fulfilling prophecy. They reflect our state of mind. They are perfect mirrors of our biases and beliefs. When they express difficulties, we either see them as a call for help or as stubbornness, contrariness, or lack of talent. By far, the greatest challenge I have faced is remembering my horses are inherently willing. Often when I cannot understand what they protect or why I am tempted to think they are unwilling. When I succumb to that attitude, I always regret it. When instead I remember they are willing, but there is a barrier that must be addressed, I am at peace. The ability to help our horses find solutions starts first with the idea that they are willing.”

Thinking that we are the “chosen ones,” automatically makes us feel that we have the right of domination and that those over whom we dominate resist if they do not do what we expect or ask of them. We approach the horse with this state of mind, and for centuries, we have missed the obvious. Over and over, the horse has willingly compensated for our incompetence. The horse has executed the piaffe despite training techniques stimulating the wrong reflexes. To perform the piaffe, the horse develops a considerable decelerating activity of the hind legs resisting forward shift of the body over the forelegs. There is little propulsive activity of the hind legs. The forelegs instead produce a considerable upward propulsive action. “The hind legs have a considerable braking activity to avoid forward movement of the body over the forelegs (…). The forelimbs have a larger propulsive activity.” (Eric Barrey, Sophie Biau, 2002)

The meaning of the words repeated over generations evolves considerably with knowledge. Engaging the hind legs, for instance, is advised for centuries as the condition allowing the horse to propel himself upward and forward. The consensus has been, and still is in closed-minded circles, that the alighting hind leg propels the body upward as soon as ground contact. In 1994, Mikael Holmström. conducted a quantitative analysis comparing the gaits of elite Swedish Warmbloods, good movers, and the gaits of school horses, poor movers. In his study, Holmström redefined the term stepping under. “The term stepping under, as used by riders and trainers, maybe correct if it is redefined to describe the position of the hind limb in the middle of the stance phase.” Holmström observed that contrary to general opinion, the stepping under of the hind legs does not increase with a higher collection. In passage and piaffe, the stepping under decreases. However, the rear leg is more forward in the middle of the stance phase during piaffe and passage.

Other studies redefined the meaning of engaging the hind legs demonstrating that at impact and during the initial sequence of the stride, the alighting back leg, as well as the foreleg, exerts first a decelerating activity resisting mostly inertia and gravity forces. During this decelerating phase, tendons, aponeurosis, fascia, store elastic energy to be used during the following propulsive and swing phase. This decelerating activity is also referred to as the “breaking phase.” During the stance, the supporting hind leg produces first a decelerating action, and then a propulsive activity. As the supporting back leg is moving backward when it starts its supporting action, the net effect is a force in the direction of the motion instead of upward as previously believed.

It is now understood that the initial thrust of the hind legs is converted into upward as well as horizontal forces by the muscular system of the thoracolumbar spine. Advanced equitation partners with the horse’s mind to develop and coordinate the sophisticated work of the back muscles. The rider’s analysis works with the horse’s mental processing. Based on a sound understanding of the athletic coordination that has to be created, the rider creates situations challenging the horse to think, but not challenging the horse to protect.  There is a fine line between challenging the horse to think and challenging the horse to protect.  Keeping in mind the horses’ inherent willingness helps the rider to negotiate that fine line without going over it.  When a horse expresses their difficulty by not doing what we ask or expect, if we keep in mind this inherent willingness, our minds will be a fertile soil from which solutions will be born.  If instead, we believe the horse is disobedient, lazy, crazy, etc., our minds will be the soil in which our horses are buried. The science is available today to explain the difficulties our horses present us within our daily work.  This science can help us interpret our horses’ problems and offer them solutions that encourage them to think and apply rather than protect.

Jean Luc Cornille 2020