Better horsemen in days gone by?

B

BSL

Well-Known Member
Joined
5 April 2010
Messages
1,666
Visit site
Firstly I would like to say, that I have regular saddle, back, and dental checks on my arab (ridden )and mini shetland companion pony. So feel strongly that all physical checks should be done first before judgments on a horse are made. In the old days, you asked a horse twice, then you told him, do you think that was wrong, or do you think we are all too " fluffy bunny" with our horses now a days, and is that in the end to their detriment? Are we having more horses with ingrained problems because of poor training, and is this because people are afraid of discipline? Interested in everyone's thoughts
 
Last edited:
Personally, I think you have the wrong impression of 'the old days'. Good horsemen understood their horses because they spent so much of their time with them. Yes, there were bad horsemen who expected to be able to treat their horses like machines but there were plenty of good ones.
Many horses with health problems were given time to come right 'turned away'. No, there wasn't the same access to veterinary procedures and medication that there is today but equally there wasn't so much expectation of a quick-fix.
There certainly wasn't as much of the 'My Little Pony' syndrome. Horses were treated like horses.
 
Pearlsasinger said:
Personally, I think you have the wrong impression of 'the old days'. Good horsemen understood their horses because they spent so much of their time with them. Yes, there were bad horsemen who expected to be able to treat their horses like machines but there were plenty of good ones.
Many horses with health problems were given time to come right 'turned away'. No, there wasn't the same access to veterinary procedures and medication that there is today but equally there wasn't so much expectation of a quick-fix.
There certainly wasn't as much of the 'My Little Pony' syndrome. Horses were treated like horses.
Click to expand...

As usual I don't think I have explained myself very well. Actually, i agree with you. People did spend more time with there horses so did understand them better, they weren't just a hobby, they were a way of life, fathers passed on to sons knowledge that we all now come on to forums to ask about. That's not a criticism, that's just life as it is now. This may not go down too well, but I also think it is too easy to acquire a horse now, without realizing the consequences of whats been taken on. Just a thought, do you remember when you were advised to dismount and walk your horse home for the last half hour. Most of the people I know only hack out for that time full stop. Yet again their choice, just an observation.
 
I'm currently doing oral history with farmers, so this is something I've been quite interested in. I'm getting quite a lot of info about the old horsemen, and working horses. It seems to me that these horses were such a huge investment for a farm, that the option to treat them badly just wasn't there. You HAD to have a fit, healthy, sound horse, and you HAD to have a well-behaved horse. The workhorses at least were far less disposable than they seem to be today.

People took great pride in their horse-knowledge, but then again they could be quite secretive about it, and some practices make you cringe today. Before WW1 you find tales of men who could freeze a horse to the spot so that it wouldn't move until he released it. It's generally thought that they used bad smelling substances rubbed on the hooves, chest, nose, or ground, to make the horse simply refuse to walk forward into the smell. I've heard stories about horsemen who were afraid of losing their jobs dosing their horses with arsenic. The theory being that the horse develops a tolerance for it, and then a dependence on it, and if the horseman is fired he won't tell his successor the 'correct' dose. If the successor under-doses the horses lose condition, if he over-doses, well... bye bye Neddy.

Most of the farmers I've spoken to who worked with horses have remembered the incredible bond they had with their horse, because they were spending so many hours with them every day, and the time spent working with them meant that they came to read each horse like a book, so health problems and discomfort would be noticed much quicker. There was also the fear that the horse would become sore or ill or lame and the boss would find out! Some of the old farmers sound genuinely terrifying. But, most of my farmers agree that they think modern horses are 'mollycoddled' and treated as pets rather than as workers, and that they get away with too much because people want to be nice to them and want to be friends with them.

But it seems, from what they say, that there wasn't much chance for novices to mess about with horses back then. Horses were a greater feature of everyday life, more people grew up with horses, more people were employed to look after them, and they would pass knowledge on to younger grooms, ploughmen, etc. More people would have spent their whole lives with a horse as their only form of transport apart from their own feet, and the horse's wellbeing would often be what the family's income relied on. The countryside was much busier, and more populous back then, so even those who didn't know much would have been surrounded by experienced horsemen (and women) who would be able to set them straight. Plus people who didn't need a horse generally wouldn't have had the budget to buy one unless they also had the budget to pay for experienced people to look after them as well. A far greater proportion of a family's income would be spent on the real basics, food, heat, light, clothing, even in a comparatively well-off household, which wouldn't leave much for non-horsey parents to buy their kid a pony. Kids with ponies, by and large, had parents with horses. According to my research, anyway.

Excuse the novel. This topic is something I'm REALLY interested in. (I am a riot at parties :-/ )
 
There seems more 'my horse simply cannot...' these days

Cannot be stabled
Cannot be left alone
Cannot go in a horsebox
Cannot stand for farrier

I know there are real cases of horses with issues but i do wonder if people are just making a rod for their own back sometimes
 
I agree fully with Pearlsasinger. Horses were more carefully watched and tended in days gone by imo. We paid more attention to every little thing in those days, not so much these days I don't think. Owners tend to just turn up and ride. Any problems they call the vet, often for ludicrously inane and trivial reasons. I'm sure, or at least I seriously hope, all is not lost and that there are still some real horsemen around these days. Have to admit, I don't see a lot of these types anymore. People seem to be in such a rush these days; quick fixes required, both medically and training wise. I'm laid back, problems sometimes take time and effort to sort out, and as far as I'm concerned, I have all the time in the world.
 
WelshD said:
There seems more 'my horse simply cannot...' these days

Cannot be stabled
Cannot be left alone
Cannot go in a horsebox
Cannot stand for farrier

I know there are real cases of horses with issues but i do wonder if people are just making a rod for their own back sometimes
Click to expand...

Agree with this, and to be a little controversial the came can be said for children too. I think the problem is that we don't have enough 'time' as it were to do things the way we used to. This leads to short cuts and bad horsemanship. I don't think that horsemanship has got worse but our cash rich, time poor lives are not conducive for good horsemandship.
 
My mother was in the land army. Everything was done with horse power. From the ploughing to delivering the milk.
My father worked a shire stallion on the farm, he would be harnessed to the hay wagon, the men throwing the hay on board, stallion standing stock still, my father would shout to him to move on to the next and he would.
He also had him gleaming and dressed in his ribbons and walked him miles to other farms to service the mares. The horse was a little different when dads ribbon box came out :) dancing and showing off, but 17 hands of power still showing complete manners.
The horses were their livelihood, it was their job to understand them and get the best from them.

My parents adored their horses, but they were not pets. They were respected, well fed and cared for, but they were there to work. A pet dog was very rare. The people worked hard, the animals worked hard, and all were the better for it.

The ease of modern life is our downfall. Don't get me wrong, I don't want a return to my parents day, I couldn't do what they did. No washing machine, no running water, no electricity. Etc etc. little human health and veterinary care.

But we seem to have gone to far the other way. When human or animal worked that hard, they were glad of a good meal and rest. They didn't have time or energy for misbehaviour. There wasn't time to worry about things that weren't important to survival, keeping a roof over their heads and food on the table.

We now have people, horses and dogs suffering more stress, anxiety and obesity than ever before, I believe the sole cause of that is the soft life we all live compared to then.
Wouldn't somewhere in between be great.
It's the same story with everything, from child protection to families struggling to earn and feed themselves, to people and animals dying due to lack of medical care.
What we had then was awful, but in our determination to right it, we have gone too far the other way and it is now also awful.
There are so many animals (and I also believe sometimes humans) that are kept alive because we can, rather than because we should.
Many people provided for when they could and should be doing it for themselves, giving them a life of no responsibility or hard work, and resulting in bad behaviour.

Most of the badly behaved horses and dogs I see, would be greatly improved by work. Half an hour walk or an hours hack is not work.


So, after all that (sorry). Yes, I believe in days gone by we had better horsemen, better horses and better dogs, but only because they had to be.
 
A very interesting topic! I've spent (wasted?) my life with hawks and dogs. That passion dictated my choice of profession, what jobs I took, and whether to be married or single. (I chose the latter!). I've also 'translated" a couple of 16th century books on falconry into modern English. It is a pity that the old books are dismissed as being rubbish just because they contain some knowledge we all know is nonsense today. That is balanced by a lot of sound common sense that has been forgotten. I haven't got around to studying more than the odd old horse book, but they seem just as full of good practical sense.

Yes, we have become more pink and fluffy! For the most part, that is a good thing. There is no longer a need to keep fighting cocks on board our navy's ships (think "cockpit") to encourage bravery as our killing is done at long range at the press of a button and not by hand to hand fighting with a cutlass!

But I regularly have to restrain myself from commenting on the doggy forum! What ever happened to the good old rolled up newspaper? I don't think offering a treat would persuade my young Labrador or spaniel not to chase a rabbit or a hare. And if my youngster growled at me I know exactly what I'd do and I'd do it without a moment's hesitation. But these days, the advice is to call in a behaviourist. Oh, I am not suggesting the soft side should be neglected. My dogs love me, but they also respect me. Of course, there is the other end of the spectrum when the owner thinks everything can be done by compulsion.

I think a lot of it comes down to respect. Whether that is the spaniel puppy growling at his owner or the drunken yobs who infest our city streets at night. There was a lot to be said for the copper who would give a youngster a swift clip around his ear and send him home to Dad with the threat of worse.

Times have changed. We've "progressed" from the hazel wand cut from the nearest hedge (that's a "carrot stick" to those too young to remember!) to the electric collar. Now that is to be banned, which can't be such a bad thing. As another poster has pointed out, it is now all about the quick fix -- and in attempting to speed things up we very often create new problems. By rearing our children in a germ free environment, we now have the highest allergy rates in the whole of Europe.

Don't get me going! :D Sadly, knowledge is very fragile and quickly lost.
 
Woolly Hat n Wellies said:
I'm currently doing oral history with farmers, so this is something I've been quite interested in. I'm getting quite a lot of info about the old horsemen, and working horses. It seems to me that these horses were such a huge investment for a farm, that the option to treat them badly just wasn't there. You HAD to have a fit, healthy, sound horse, and you HAD to have a well-behaved horse. The workhorses at least were far less disposable than they seem to be today.

People took great pride in their horse-knowledge, but then again they could be quite secretive about it, and some practices make you cringe today. Before WW1 you find tales of men who could freeze a horse to the spot so that it wouldn't move until he released it. It's generally thought that they used bad smelling substances rubbed on the hooves, chest, nose, or ground, to make the horse simply refuse to walk forward into the smell. I've heard stories about horsemen who were afraid of losing their jobs dosing their horses with arsenic. The theory being that the horse develops a tolerance for it, and then a dependence on it, and if the horseman is fired he won't tell his successor the 'correct' dose. If the successor under-doses the horses lose condition, if he over-doses, well... bye bye Neddy.

Most of the farmers I've spoken to who worked with horses have remembered the incredible bond they had with their horse, because they were spending so many hours with them every day, and the time spent working with them meant that they came to read each horse like a book, so health problems and discomfort would be noticed much quicker. There was also the fear that the horse would become sore or ill or lame and the boss would find out! Some of the old farmers sound genuinely terrifying. But, most of my farmers agree that they think modern horses are 'mollycoddled' and treated as pets rather than as workers, and that they get away with too much because people want to be nice to them and want to be friends with them.

But it seems, from what they say, that there wasn't much chance for novices to mess about with horses back then. Horses were a greater feature of everyday life, more people grew up with horses, more people were employed to look after them, and they would pass knowledge on to younger grooms, ploughmen, etc. More people would have spent their whole lives with a horse as their only form of transport apart from their own feet, and the horse's wellbeing would often be what the family's income relied on. The countryside was much busier, and more populous back then, so even those who didn't know much would have been surrounded by experienced horsemen (and women) who would be able to set them straight. Plus people who didn't need a horse generally wouldn't have had the budget to buy one unless they also had the budget to pay for experienced people to look after them as well. A far greater proportion of a family's income would be spent on the real basics, food, heat, light, clothing, even in a comparatively well-off household, which wouldn't leave much for non-horsey parents to buy their kid a pony. Kids with ponies, by and large, had parents with horses. According to my research, anyway.

Excuse the novel. This topic is something I'm REALLY interested in. (I am a riot at parties :-/ )
Click to expand...

I'd never heard of the use of arsenic on horses before, eeek! This was really interesting to read :)
 
I think there are many problems today, but there is also a tendency to look back with rose tinted spectacles. Of course there are more horses with issues today - in the past they would have either been shot or sold down market until they were worked to death. I don't suppose any horses are driven with theirs helds held high with bearing reins these days & if you read Black Beauty it is clear that poor care is not a new thing.
 
It is funny that this thread has been posted, as my boyfriend and I were having a conversation last night about the art of conversation now being lost, were people more intelligent in days gone by and why have things changed so much.

We agreed that people had to be more resourceful for survival many years ago. It was not out of choice, but out of necessity. Now everything is at our finger tips, in the easiest and cheapest way possible, and so our minds probably do not retain the information that they once use to. We hit the google search button, find what we want, and that is it- no studying, no learning the subject, no experience from it. We are bombarded with some much on a daily basis that I am not suprised that we have become a sedentary breed.

I agree (and I am only 25!!), that my and younger generations want things immediately, there seems to be a sense of urgency about everything, whether that is a 'quick fix' for our horse, or the latest trend. We don't even have to earn our money before purchasing- credit and loans are aplenty.

I think we do have a lot to be grateful for however. That includes knowledge in order to help our horses for treatment which would have been a bullet before, the general understanding of horse care and pyschology has also come along way from the olden days.

That said, as above, far too many people want things NOW, and that means many novice people will happily buy a horse with no prior experience or knowledge of keeping one, feeding one or caring for one. This includes amatuers breeding to make a quick buck, cutting corners with training etc. Things need to be far more regulated in order to maintain some standard of care for them.

I would like to think that I have good experience in caring for my own horse and that I maintain my own high standards when it comes to her welfare, this includes basic manners and mutual respect- which I don't think people always have for their animals. I was lucky enough to be taught by a very 'old school' type instructor, who taught us from the basics. If we did not care for our ponies, we did not get to ride and enjoy them, if we did not put in time and effort to learn and understand, we did not ride. Our horses were not machines, we had to learn about respect, handling them and understanding how and why. I have a lot to be thankful for from this lady, and I think her ways of teaching made me so much appreciative of it all.
 
If you read 18th and 19th century texts, including the classic, 'Black Beauty,' it's apparent that there were good horsemen and bad horsemen, and while a horse may luck out and get a nice semi-retirement pulling the ladies around in a cart like Beauty, many more ended up like poor Ginger, worked to death.

There were a lot more people around who knew how to train a horse -- obviously, because horses were needed as transport and draught animals, thus knowledge of how to deal with them was more prevalent than it is now. That said, there were a lot interesting practices that those of us with 21st century sensibilities might not view as entirely humane.

I don't know that a lot of horses had better lives, though. The horse on full livery who's owner is afraid to ride, so it spends its days lolling in a pasture with its mates, is probably a hell of a lot happier than one 200 years ago pulling a hansom cab in London until it breaks down.
 
littleshetland said:
'England is a paradise for women, and hell for horses......' - Robert Burton, English writer and clergyman 1577 - 1640.

Beware those rose tinted spectacles
Click to expand...

very true

Now I can't quite remember the 16th century, I'm not THAT old but there's always been good and bad horsemanship and horsemastership. There's also always been shenanigans as far as competition is concerned (and there always will be as long as there are humans and chances to win money or prestige involved)

The biggest change to me seems to be time, not just in the sense of turning an injured horse away for recouperation, but also a more defined close season for horse sports, so less pressure to be on top form all year round. Thinking back it could be easier to 'make' more hours in a day years ago - for example I could set off onto a quiet country lane in winter half-light knowing that it was extremely unlikely to meet any traffic except a couple of regulars who looked out for me as I did them. Couldn't do the same now as it's turned into a rat-run.

The one thing that does seem to be diminishing is people just getting simple pleasure from having a horse, spending time tending to it and riding it. There does seem to be more pressure to 'do stuff' now.
 
In my 40 years with horses, I think things have improved a lot in terms of people now recognising that "misbehaviour" may be down to pain in some cases. Yes, some people are now so "fluffy bunny" that a flybuck is diagnosed instantly as kissing spines and the horse retired, but most people have enough knowledge of their own horse to decide when something needs further investigation.
I don't think horses had a great life in the past at all and life expectancy was certainly shorter. When I was growing up, a horse aged 20 was regarded as distinctly "elderly" but these days many are fit and active well into their 20s.
I do think, however, that many of the modern issues with horses are down to over-feeding and under-working, particularly the latter. I am (sort of) blessed with a horse who forgets his manners if not worked at least five times a week and I am conscious that all to often his "work" is a quick lunge or 20 minutes in the school because I am too busy to fit in any more.
Finally, agree with the poster who said about how people used to get off and walk the last half-hour - we used to do that after a long hack when I was younger and my horses have always known that when I loosen their girth on the way home, we are into dawdle and relax mode. However, people don't even seem to do that these days!
 
BSL said:
Are we having more horses with ingrained problems because of poor training, and is this because people are afraid of discipline?
Click to expand...
Depends how you define 'discipline'. It can mean a willingness to punish and chastise. It can also mean the self-discipline to follow a rigorous approach in attending to detail and constantly striving to improve your communication skills. The first is easy, the second a bit harder. I believe the first without the second is worth nothing.
 
It's hard to quantify better or worse over time.

I think that, for all the reasons given above, most people who had horses or looked after them, were probably more knowledgeable and experienced than the average horse owner today - and I think there was probably less naughtiness from horses because they were worked harder and were punished for bad behaviour instead of given the benefit of the doubt as they often are today.

I would expect that there were more horses with ulcers or kissing spine putting up with discomfort, or simply ending up shot because there was less of an alternative for a horse that could not do a job.

And it only takes going back a hundred years or so when you had horses pulling cabs all day in the city that never got a day of turnout, or pit ponies spending their days down mines.

The average horse in this day and age lives a far better life. And yes, people on average are softer on horses, and sometimes too soft.

Some of the best horsemen I know would be considered cruel by some, because when a horse steps out of line they'll give it a good hiding if the behaviour warrants it. But these are the people who get horses who have become nappy, horrible monsters, and turn them back into nice horses that can do a job. And the horses are happier for it too. They know when to be hard, and they know when to be kind - and that is true horsemanship in my opinion.
 
I recall a conversation with old yo ( in 70s) when I was soaking hay for my horse with copd. It went along the lines of "we never had these new fangled problems in my day". I asked if they never had horses with broken wind. Answer was no - we shot them.
 
xspiralx said:
Some of the best horsemen I know would be considered cruel by some, because when a horse steps out of line they'll give it a good hiding if the behaviour warrants it. But these are the people who get horses who have become nappy, horrible monsters, and turn them back into nice horses that can do a job. And the horses are happier for it too. They know when to be hard, and they know when to be kind - and that is true horsemanship in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Rarer are the horsemen who can turn horrible monsters into nice horses without needing to administer a 'good hiding'!
 
WelshD said:
There seems more 'my horse simply cannot...' these days

Cannot be stabled
Cannot be left alone
Cannot go in a horsebox
Cannot stand for farrier

I know there are real cases of horses with issues but i do wonder if people are just making a rod for their own back sometimes
Click to expand...

I agree with this.

There is also a lot more opportunity today to dress your horses up in onesies and outfits - which were never available before. Growing up in a hunting family the most fashionable we got were Witney blankets and duvet rugs.

There are a lot of complete novices coming into the horsey world, who either rely on other novices for advice or so called experts who baffle with bullshite.
 
Personally, I can't see how giving a horse a good hiding is good training myself! Although I don't like to hit horses I can see that a sharp smack at the right time may have a place but a good hiding smacks of a person who has lost the plot and their temper to me. You can try to ratioanalize it by saying the horse is being dominant/is a dominant personality and needs to be put in his place (dominated) but to me it just makes a horse afraid/very wary of that person and sore!

I think there are good, bad and average now and in the past but we know so much more about how horses tick and what they need to be healthy than in the past, things should have improved surely? It would be a bit depressing to think they haven't or have even got worse from the horses POV. Too many of us "fluffies" about obviously! ;)
 
Yes, I think that a sharp smack is quite different from a 'good hiding' - especially in its potential effect on the horse. Whether it was done in temper or calmly is important, given that horses are sensitive to intent. I would go as far as to say that the best horsemen never lose their temper. To me, anyway, it is a sign of failure or incompetence.

However, I do not know exactly what xspiralx envisages when referring to 'a good hiding'. Maybe a sharp smack (or tug at the leadrope, or equivalent short, sharp shock delivered without anger or rancour) is what he/she had in mind.
 
I just spent the last 5 days at a clinic with Warwick Schiller. Now he is a proper horseman. His inspiration comes from Ray Hunt, the great grandfather of "natural horsemanship". ( warwick doesn't like to use this term because of it's connotations to fluffy bunny ideals) and other greats such as Martin Back and Buck Brannaman. I would say it is more traditional in that the way of training is accepting a horse as a horse and not humanising it. This is a modern day problem with how most animals are now treated- it was rare in the old days for dogs to live in the house or horses to be kissed and hugged and told how pretty they are. The poster before who spoke about people making excuses- "my horse doesn't like......." Is correct. The clinic was the most eye opening thing I have ever taken part in with my horse and makes me sad for how modern horsemanship has gone.
 
fburton said:
Yes, I think that a sharp smack is quite different from a 'good hiding' - especially in its potential effect on the horse. Whether it was done in temper or calmly is important, given that horses are sensitive to intent. I would go as far as to say that the best horsemen never lose their temper. To me, anyway, it is a sign of failure or incompetence.

However, I do not know exactly what xspiralx envisages when referring to 'a good hiding'. Maybe a sharp smack (or tug at the leadrope, or equivalent short, sharp shock delivered without anger or rancour) is what he/she had in mind.
Click to expand...
I agree about intent and striving to not get angry or lose your temper but can a good hiding be given without emotion/intent?
I am aware people will have completely different ideas of what a good hiding is though. To me it means a good thrashing/repeated hard hitting for more than a second or two.
Do you think there is a difference if my definition is a one off or a regular strategy.
I too wonder what happens to provoke a human to administer a good hiding.
 
Last edited:
Horses read emotion/intent better than most people. I have figured that I can stop unwanted behaviour more effectively by smacking a dressage whip against my boot with a lot of intent (and noise) and yes, a pissed off attitude than I could by actually smacking the horse. Horse feels no pain, but boy, she gets the message. It is the hardest thing to teach people, how to work with horses using their energy. I show them how I can walk up to a horse with no energy and give it a hug, and then a second later, walk up to the horse with energy and intent and get it to move backwards. People like Mark Rashid and Buck Brannaman teach this stuff. The biggest issue I see is that a lot of people are waffley and indecisive in their manner around horses and unaware of their own energy, and the horse has no real clue what the human expects.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top