By Michel Henriquet and Jean-Claude Racinet
A Debate on Nuno and Baucher
Between
La Gueriniere "accompanied" Oliveira when he proclaimed the necessity of the trot and the immediate preoccupation on the part of the rider to push the young horse forward into this gait, work at a slow and shortened walk, lower the haunches by means of halts and half-halts, the sumptuous shoulder-in, the haunches-in, the constant search for a cadence which leads to outstanding passages, and, finally, this obsession with lightness and brilliance, maintaining a free and unrestricted position. He succeeded in suppling his horse without the use of pillars, even though he was well familiar with this technique.
Baucher came to Oliveira's aid when he "resolved force and movement" (interruption of the movement in order to make contractions yield), with the concept of "hand without legs, legs without hands" (the use of a single force at a time), with work in hand, supplings and flexions wherein he excelled, descentes de mains et de jambes (momentary yielding of hand and leg aids without altering the horse's equilibrium), the subtle contact of the spur, and the effets d'ensemble (coordinated effects).
This "in vivo" synthesis of two techniques and two philosophies, which had so divided the equestrian world, was achieved by Nuno Oliveira with such prodigious results in the course of the past 50 years. These results, know to all, make him the first innovator and the greatest equestrian intelligence of this century.
A Debate on Nuno and Baucher
Between
Michel Henriquet and Jean-Claude Racinet
This from Michel Henriquet:
Baucher or the equivocal dogmatism
I hesitate to mobilize once again this excellent rider-translator that is Hilda Nelson, but I do want to bring up a few points mentioned by our friend Jean Racinet in "Comment and Response," which appeared in the December 1995 issue of D&CT. It should be pointed out that, contrary to Racinet's thinking, I have worked as many central and northern European horses as I have Iberian horses. In fact, at the moment, I have only one Lusitanian horse qualifying to participate in the Olympic Games; alas, he has been convalescing now for several months. At the moment, I also have in my stable two Dutch, a Westphalian, and one Russian Holsteiner.
All of them are being worked by my wife Catherine and by me. The Westphalian is seven years of age, 1.80 meter, and in 1995 came first twice in the Prix St. Georges and once second and placed at the Intermediate I. The Dutch horse came second (behind the Westphalian) and has placed three times. All of them execute the airs required for the Grand Prix and possess and equilibrium and a lightness that is the equal of any Iberian horse.
For this accomplishment, I thank Nuno Oliveira and, through him, La Gueriniere and Baucher.
Concerning the philosophy of my master. Short of being the "simplistic" rider, attributed to me by Jean Racinet, I can say that more than 30 years of regular work with Nuno Oliveira, as well as with my three of four Portuguese co-disciples, have given us a clear understanding of the sources from which Oliveira drew. The recent new edition of Oliveira's early work, preceded by an introduction in the form of an autobiography, which his children asked me to do, especially his son Joao, whom his father named as his spiritual heir, has just been published.
I hereby present some excerpts that pertain to the matters at issue in connection with Jean Racinet. Joao Oliveira, who became acquainted with my introduction when he received the new edition of his father's book, telephoned me at length and said: "I am calling you to tell you that I have never seen an analysis that is so accurate; you have so clearly understood the personality of my father, his philosophy and his technique."
"Without denying for an instant the beneficial results brought about by the pillars when used by the beneficial results brought about by the pillars when used by the master of Versailles, one must acknowledge their eventual fall from grace. Nothing would replace these pillars until 50 years after the closing of the doors of the School of Versailles, when Baucher communicated his methode to the equestrian world. In this book, which deals with his first period, Baucher describes work in hand, wherein the trainer, a mobile and intelligent pillar, realized, in place and through movement, isolated and specific supplings of all the areas of the horse; this led, with considerably less risk, to a rassembler and a gymnastic that are more complete than when they were acquired at the pillars."
This from Michel Henriquet:
Baucher or the equivocal dogmatism
I hesitate to mobilize once again this excellent rider-translator that is Hilda Nelson, but I do want to bring up a few points mentioned by our friend Jean Racinet in "Comment and Response," which appeared in the December 1995 issue of D&CT. It should be pointed out that, contrary to Racinet's thinking, I have worked as many central and northern European horses as I have Iberian horses. In fact, at the moment, I have only one Lusitanian horse qualifying to participate in the Olympic Games; alas, he has been convalescing now for several months. At the moment, I also have in my stable two Dutch, a Westphalian, and one Russian Holsteiner.
All of them are being worked by my wife Catherine and by me. The Westphalian is seven years of age, 1.80 meter, and in 1995 came first twice in the Prix St. Georges and once second and placed at the Intermediate I. The Dutch horse came second (behind the Westphalian) and has placed three times. All of them execute the airs required for the Grand Prix and possess and equilibrium and a lightness that is the equal of any Iberian horse.
For this accomplishment, I thank Nuno Oliveira and, through him, La Gueriniere and Baucher.
Concerning the philosophy of my master. Short of being the "simplistic" rider, attributed to me by Jean Racinet, I can say that more than 30 years of regular work with Nuno Oliveira, as well as with my three of four Portuguese co-disciples, have given us a clear understanding of the sources from which Oliveira drew. The recent new edition of Oliveira's early work, preceded by an introduction in the form of an autobiography, which his children asked me to do, especially his son Joao, whom his father named as his spiritual heir, has just been published.
I hereby present some excerpts that pertain to the matters at issue in connection with Jean Racinet. Joao Oliveira, who became acquainted with my introduction when he received the new edition of his father's book, telephoned me at length and said: "I am calling you to tell you that I have never seen an analysis that is so accurate; you have so clearly understood the personality of my father, his philosophy and his technique."
"Without denying for an instant the beneficial results brought about by the pillars when used by the beneficial results brought about by the pillars when used by the master of Versailles, one must acknowledge their eventual fall from grace. Nothing would replace these pillars until 50 years after the closing of the doors of the School of Versailles, when Baucher communicated his methode to the equestrian world. In this book, which deals with his first period, Baucher describes work in hand, wherein the trainer, a mobile and intelligent pillar, realized, in place and through movement, isolated and specific supplings of all the areas of the horse; this led, with considerably less risk, to a rassembler and a gymnastic that are more complete than when they were acquired at the pillars."
Not satisfied with this remarkable discovery (as well as with some others), Baucher, who wanted to be considered the complete innovator, eventually reached a total impasse with respect to the rich and subtle progression introduced by La Gueriniere, to the point of even eliminating the term "shoulder-in" from his vocabulary. It is from then on that a period of confusion began to make itself felt and which lingered right into our own period; this confusion resulted in two schools opposing each other, eventually contributing to the veritable decline of French equitation.
I found myself on the side of the Baucherists and on a road to perdition until I discovered Maitre Oliveira. Nonetheless, I still continued to consider the equitation as practiced by the Ecole Versailles as one that went back to the Middle Ages.
It was only little by little that I became aware that what the Master was doing was actually attempting an authentic fusion of the two schools in order to create a French equitation purified of all exclusive and personal antagonisms, of systems that were too rough, and of false innovations. Thus, out of what were unquestionably historical roots, he fashioned a uniform doctrine.
La Gueriniere "accompanied" Oliveira when he proclaimed the necessity of the trot and the immediate preoccupation on the part of the rider to push the young horse forward into this gait, work at a slow and shortened walk, lower the haunches by means of halts and half-halts, the sumptuous shoulder-in, the haunches-in, the constant search for a cadence which leads to outstanding passages, and, finally, this obsession with lightness and brilliance, maintaining a free and unrestricted position. He succeeded in suppling his horse without the use of pillars, even though he was well familiar with this technique.
Baucher came to Oliveira's aid when he "resolved force and movement" (interruption of the movement in order to make contractions yield), with the concept of "hand without legs, legs without hands" (the use of a single force at a time), with work in hand, supplings and flexions wherein he excelled, descentes de mains et de jambes (momentary yielding of hand and leg aids without altering the horse's equilibrium), the subtle contact of the spur, and the effets d'ensemble (coordinated effects).
This twofold inspiration gave Oliveira the possibility of always placing horses in an ideal rassembler, a dream-like rassembler, be it with Iberian horses, which he rode daily a la Gueriniere, or with quasi-thoroughbreds, horses that were often worse than the ones Baucher rode.
This "in vivo" synthesis of two techniques and two philosophies, which had so divided the equestrian world, was achieved by Nuno Oliveira with such prodigious results in the course of the past 50 years. These results, know to all, make him the first innovator and the greatest equestrian intelligence of this century.
Indeed, Oliveira appreciated Baucher considerably and made use of a number of his precepts. I have already mentioned those he chose and those he rejected.
Oliveira's poetic ideal (one need only read his works to be convinced of this) belonged much more to the universe of La Gueriniere than that of Baucher, who stated that "the horse, as soon as he is ridden, must only function in accordance with a transmitted strength… a struggle will necessarily occur between the horse and the rider," or further still, "form the very beginning it is important to give the horse this first lesson in subjugation and make him understand the power of man."
I do not want to hear about the first and second manner. It is obvious that Baucher was definitely handicapped after the terrible accident and that he could never again be what he had been before. Indeed, one looks in vain for the name of the a horse trained in accordance with the second manner who has achieved the reputation of a Partisan or a Capitaine.
The drama of Baucherism is Baucher's own drama, this quasi-characterial imperative to deny everything that had occurred before him, this jealous sensitivity that made him refuse to apply the method, even to evoke the very name of this golden key to equestrian art, namely, the shoulder-in.
According to him, nothing existed before him. Not satisfied with being a great innovator, he wanted to be a creator. One should not try to look elsewhere for the cause of the failure of the diffusion of his method, the serious deviationism of his disciples, and the violent rejection of Baucherism on the part of the ecuyers in the rest of Europe.
Indeed, the horses utilized at the time had very little if no aptitude for the rassembler which the horses of the School of Versailles possessed; only the coercive methods of the first manner, often verging on violence, could make these poorly endowed horses execute the required movements.
As far as I am concerned, Baucher could have risen to the level of the universal equestrian greats had he been satisfied in accepting a part of the heritage of the ancients and simply adding his own considerable discoveries. Instead, he carried along with him and after him a cohort of riders who got lost in their attempt to apply his precepts rigorously and who never succeeded in training their horses.
Less naïve undoubtedly, those close to him did not hesitate to use the heritage of Versailles: General Faverot de Kerbrech in Dressage du Cheval de Dehors describes in detail, yet without mentioning the term, the shoulder-in, and refers to it, instead, as "lateral effects." General L'Hotte, Baucher's most faithful discipline, in Questions Equestres, Chapter V, gives the following description: "when we practice the lesson of the shoulder-in;" further on, in Chapter VIII, L'Hotte criticizes "the error into which riders fall when they insist on giving their horses, who have a naturally disposed low neck, a marked elevation of the neck… whereby their loins, their over-charged hocks are impeded in their free play, and the harmony of movements is destroyed." Eventually, Henri Baucher, the master's son, will recommend the shoulder-in in his Training of the Horse in Thirty Lessons (1881).
I conclude by saying that if from the XIXth Century on to the present, the exhaustive virtues of Baucher have been extolled by some of the theoreticians of Baucherism, we have yet to see a single horse, from his early breaking-in period, on to all the airs rassembles trained by Baucherism alone.
On the other hand, it is known that there exist one or two ecuyers of the Vienna School and some other horsemen who have created works of art, inherited from the Ecole de Versailles.
Reprinted with Permission from the Publishers of Dressage & CT !
Oliveira's poetic ideal (one need only read his works to be convinced of this) belonged much more to the universe of La Gueriniere than that of Baucher, who stated that "the horse, as soon as he is ridden, must only function in accordance with a transmitted strength… a struggle will necessarily occur between the horse and the rider," or further still, "form the very beginning it is important to give the horse this first lesson in subjugation and make him understand the power of man."
I do not want to hear about the first and second manner. It is obvious that Baucher was definitely handicapped after the terrible accident and that he could never again be what he had been before. Indeed, one looks in vain for the name of the a horse trained in accordance with the second manner who has achieved the reputation of a Partisan or a Capitaine.
The drama of Baucherism is Baucher's own drama, this quasi-characterial imperative to deny everything that had occurred before him, this jealous sensitivity that made him refuse to apply the method, even to evoke the very name of this golden key to equestrian art, namely, the shoulder-in.
According to him, nothing existed before him. Not satisfied with being a great innovator, he wanted to be a creator. One should not try to look elsewhere for the cause of the failure of the diffusion of his method, the serious deviationism of his disciples, and the violent rejection of Baucherism on the part of the ecuyers in the rest of Europe.
Indeed, the horses utilized at the time had very little if no aptitude for the rassembler which the horses of the School of Versailles possessed; only the coercive methods of the first manner, often verging on violence, could make these poorly endowed horses execute the required movements.
As far as I am concerned, Baucher could have risen to the level of the universal equestrian greats had he been satisfied in accepting a part of the heritage of the ancients and simply adding his own considerable discoveries. Instead, he carried along with him and after him a cohort of riders who got lost in their attempt to apply his precepts rigorously and who never succeeded in training their horses.
Less naïve undoubtedly, those close to him did not hesitate to use the heritage of Versailles: General Faverot de Kerbrech in Dressage du Cheval de Dehors describes in detail, yet without mentioning the term, the shoulder-in, and refers to it, instead, as "lateral effects." General L'Hotte, Baucher's most faithful discipline, in Questions Equestres, Chapter V, gives the following description: "when we practice the lesson of the shoulder-in;" further on, in Chapter VIII, L'Hotte criticizes "the error into which riders fall when they insist on giving their horses, who have a naturally disposed low neck, a marked elevation of the neck… whereby their loins, their over-charged hocks are impeded in their free play, and the harmony of movements is destroyed." Eventually, Henri Baucher, the master's son, will recommend the shoulder-in in his Training of the Horse in Thirty Lessons (1881).
I conclude by saying that if from the XIXth Century on to the present, the exhaustive virtues of Baucher have been extolled by some of the theoreticians of Baucherism, we have yet to see a single horse, from his early breaking-in period, on to all the airs rassembles trained by Baucherism alone.
On the other hand, it is known that there exist one or two ecuyers of the Vienna School and some other horsemen who have created works of art, inherited from the Ecole de Versailles.
Reprinted with Permission from the Publishers of Dressage & CT !
