University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

From destrier to danseur: the role of the horse in early modern French noble identity

(USC Thesis Other)

From destrier to danseur: the role of the horse in early modern French noble identity

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content FROM DESTRIER TO DANSEUR:
THE ROLE OF THE HORSE
IN EARLY MODERN FRENCH NOBLE IDENTITY
by
Treva J. Tucker
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(HISTORY)
August 2007
Copyright 2007 Treva J. Tucker
ii
Abstract
This study argues that horses and horsemanship played a crucial role in
refashioning noble identity in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century France. During
this period, the traditional nobility experienced a variety of military, political, social,
and cultural changes in its circumstances. Part of the nobles’ response to these
changes was to gradually restructure the way they perceived and defined themselves.
Between roughly 1550 and 1650, they transitioned from a medieval warrior-knight
identity to an early modern courtier-aristocrat identity.
The dissertation explores the ways horsemanship facilitated this shift in noble
beliefs. The destrier—the battle mount of the medieval knight—was a key
component of noble identity going into this period of transition, when the definition
of nobility revolved around heavy cavalry service and the qualities comprising what
the nobles called vertu. The manège horse—the “dance partner” of the early modern
aristocrat in the movements of manège equitation—offered an unmatched platform
for displaying key components of noble identity by the end of this period, when the
definition of nobility revolved around physical grace and sprezzatura, or the
appearance of effortlessness no matter what the task at hand.
The dissertation focuses on a subset of manège equitation, the spectacular
and dramatic “airs above the ground.” Using contemporary manuals of
horsemanship as evidence, it argues that these movements served as a vehicle for the
transition in noble identity, because they allowed noblemen simultaneously to
demonstrate the old and familiar qualities of martial vertu and the newly emerging
iii
qualities of grace and effortlessness. Horsemanship functioned as a bridge between
the old and new definitions, serving as a familiar and comforting touchstone for the
nobles as they struggled to adapt to their changing circumstances.
As knights gradually evolved into gentlemen, the mounted display of
noblesse moved from the battlefield to the manège, and the display mechanism
evolved from the medieval destrier to the early modern equine danseur. By
facilitating this shift from an obsolete identity to a more relevant and effective one,
horses and horsemanship supported and assisted the nobility’s successful adaptation,
and thus ultimately contributed to its survival and continued vitality as well.
iv
Table of Contents
Abstract ii
Introduction 1
Thesis and Arguments 1
Historiography 7
Methodology 21
PART 1: THE NOBLE CONTEXT 43
Chapter 1: Noble Definition and Its Challenges 44
The Definition of Nobility 44
Challenges to the Definition 62
Chapter 2: The Nobility’s Response to the Challenges 79
Continuity, or Change? 79
The General Response 83
The Mounted Response 99
Continuity and Change 105
PART 2: THE EQUESTRIAN CONTEXT 111
Chapter 3: The History of Manège Equitation in France 112
The Italian Precursors 112
The French Académies 117
The Académie Curriculum 126
Chapter 4: The Sources and Their Relevance 143
The Significance of Manuals of Horsemanship 143
The Authors and Their Texts 149
Chapter 5: The Airs of the Manège Defined 172
PART 3: CONTINUITY 185
Chapter 6: Vertu and Manège Equitation 187
Chapter 7: Vertu and the Pesade 225
Chapter 8: Vertu and the Courbette 244
v
Chapter 9: Vertu and the Capriole 279
PART 4: CHANGE 297
Chapter 10: Grace, Sprezzatura, and Manège Equitation 300
Chapter 11: Grace, Sprezzatura, and the Capriole 316
Conclusion 333
Methodology Revisited 333
Thesis and Arguments Revisited 349
Horsemanship in Decline … or Not? 353
Additional Research Questions 360
Closing Remarks 363
Bibliography 368
1
INTRODUCTION
Thesis and Arguments
In the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, the traditional French
nobility—that is, the long-established hereditary nobility, often referred to as the
“sword” or warrior nobility—struggled to adapt to a variety of military, political,
social, and cultural changes that appeared to threaten its very existence.
1
During this
period, many of the elements that previously had defined noblesse were being
disputed, displaced, or simply rendered obsolete. In response to these changes, the
nobles gradually restructured the way in which they perceived themselves and
defined nobility. Between roughly 1550 and 1650, they transitioned from an
essentially medieval warrior-knight identity to an early modern courtier-aristocrat
identity.
One of the few commonalties between the nobility’s old self-perception and
definition and the emerging new one was the nobility’s longstanding relationship
with horses and horsemanship. For centuries, the ability to ride—and to ride well—
had been part of many activities that were considered quintessentially noble:
warfare, jousting and tourneying, running at the ring and quintain, hunting, and so
forth. Going into the second half of the sixteenth century, nobles continued to use
horses for all these activities. By the late sixteenth century, traditional French nobles
Unless otherwise noted, all translations in this document are mine.
1
The arguments in this study pertain specifically to traditional French noblemen and not to all those
who were considered noble in the eyes of the law. The arguments do not, for example, reflect the
experience or belief system either of noble women (of whatever type) or of men who had achieved
their noble status through service in royal office—the civil, bureaucratic, or “robe” nobility.
2
had added to the list the art of riding and training horses in the elaborate movements
practiced in the manège, or riding arena.
2
By the mid-seventeenth century, nobles
continued to use horses for warfare, but in very different ways, and the pseudo-
military tournament sports had evolved into entirely non-military forms of mounted
display. These included manège equitation as well as various related forms of
mounted spectacle, such as the carrousel, the equestrian ballet, and highly stylized
mounted games.
3
Although the way in which the horse was used changed fairly
significantly between roughly 1550 and 1650, in all of these activities the horse itself
remained the common thread.
Precisely because horsemanship was a source of both continuity and change
throughout this period, it was far more than merely an attribute of nobility. This
study will argue that it played a crucial role in the refashioning of noble self-
perception and definition. Horsemanship was simultaneously a familiar and
comforting touchstone during a time when the nobles felt besieged, and a dynamic
2
In the primary sources, the term manège is used in several ways. It can mean the riding arena itself
(e.g., un manège couvert), a specific movement or group of movements (e.g., les manèges par haut), a
particular style of riding (e.g., le manège de guerre), or simply the act of riding and training
(“l’exercice de monter à cheval”). On this variant usage of the term, see the online Dictionnaire de
l’Académie Française, 1694 ed., s.v. “manège,” http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/efts/ARTFL/projects/
dicos/ACADEMIE/PREMIERE/ (hereafter cited as DAF); Georges Guillet de St. George, Les Arts de
l’homme d’epée, ou Le Dictionnaire du gentilhomme (The Hague: Adrian Moetjens, 1680), 91-92.
Although Guillet’s text technically is a dictionary, the author often offers several variant definitions
for a given term, each under its own heading; for example, there are four entries for manège or
variants thereof, all of which are applicable for this footnote. Rather than listing each entry separately
using the sub verbo format, references to Guillet’s text therefore are cited by page number. In cases
in which a page reference is to a word other than the one under discussion in the text, both the page
number and the term are given.
3
The ballet à cheval was a choreographed group performance of manège maneuvers set to music; the
games involved complicated turns and departs that relied on previous mastery of manège equitation;
the carrousel could include a horse ballet, mounted games, or both, any or all of which could be
performed independently or as part of an overarching theatrical framework.
3
vehicle for responding effectively to all the changes around them. At least part of
the reason manège equitation was so popular among late sixteenth- and early
seventeenth-century French nobles was because of the symbolic function that it
served. During the second half of the sixteenth century, the traditional nobles
believed that their role in society and even the very existence of nobility as they
understood it were being threatened by a variety of factors. The new form of
horsemanship allowed the nobility to retain at least some of its links to an
increasingly obsolete but profoundly imbedded set of beliefs about the meaning of
noblesse while simultaneously responding to various external pressures in ways that
eventually would result in a new set of beliefs. Initially, the unconscious
manipulation of such an old and familiar attribute helped make it possible for the
nobility to continue to perceive itself according to its old definition despite
increasing evidence to the contrary. The illusion thus created then served as a source
of comfort and focus throughout the ensuing and inevitable period of transition, until
the new belief system was sufficiently well established for the nobility to be able to
fully let go of its old one. Horsemanship thus was uniquely suited to facilitate the
nobles’ adaptive process, but in a way that did not violate their sense of tradition.
While several scholars have examined the shift in early modern French noble
self-perception and definition as well as the various reasons that contributed to it, no
one has systematically explored the role played by horses and horsemanship in this
context. All of the scholars who have explored noble identity acknowledge the
central importance of cavalry service to the noble ideal; many of them make
4
reference to the role played by tournaments and later types of mounted spectacle in
noble culture; some of them even discuss manège equitation and mounted games
within the context of noble education and the rise of the académies in the very late
sixteenth century. On the other hand, no one seems to recognize the absolutely
fundamental centrality to these key elements of noble self-perception and definition
of horses and horsemanship, without which none of these activities could have taken
place.
4
Similarly, no one has considered manuals of horsemanship as a potential
resource for shedding new light on the shift in early modern French noble identity.
Yet these texts provide a wealth of information on noble self-perception and
definition during this period and are in fact a valuable resource for accessing the
beliefs of contemporary nobles about the qualities of nobility. For one thing, and in
contrast to other sources that reveal those beliefs, these texts make clear how
important horses and horsemanship were to nobles of this period. Simply by
recapturing this overlooked yet crucial element of early modern French noble
identity, we gain a new and more complete understanding of this group. Most
importantly, however, manuals of horsemanship are a rich resource for better
understanding the nobility’s response to the various military, political, social, and
4
Lucien Clare is one exception. Speaking specifically of mounted games in the context of carrousels,
he notes: “Sous le fatras des perruques et des habits à lambrequins, les rejetons des plus nobles
familles de l’Europe laissent voir à qui les observe une maîtrise parfaite de l’exercice du cheval,
qu’occulte en partie la sobriété des relations sur ce sujet.” Lucien Clare, La Quintaine, la course de
bague et le jeu des têtes: Etude historique et ethno-linguistique d’une famille de jeux équestres (Paris:
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 1983), 78. In other words, the sources focus on the
pomp and spectacle to such an extent that the central importance of the riding tends to be obscured,
yet without perfect mastery of their mounts, nobles would never have been able to participate in these
events.
5
cultural changes that threatened its beliefs about the meaning of noblesse. These
treatises discuss, with exceptional clarity and in great detail, the various qualities
needed by the nobleman in order to be a successful horseman. In doing so, they
reveal how the nobility unconsciously manipulated this longstanding attribute to
create a space for its beliefs that was at once reassuring in its familiarity and yet
sufficiently different from what had gone before to allow for change. The nobles
were still mounted, and they still used many of the traditional qualities needed for
success in battles and tournaments, yet they also were performing a new type of
mounted activity, for which they needed many of the new qualities that only recently
had become important elements of the noble construct.
The manuals of horsemanship focus primarily on manège equitation,
including the dramatic “airs above the ground,” also known as the high airs or the
airs relevés. The texts make repeated reference to certain qualities required by the
successful horseman whenever he is mounted and particularly when he is attempting
these airs. Many of the qualities were essential components of martial vertu, which
long had been viewed by the nobles as a central characteristic of nobility, but whose
meaning and centrality were being threatened from various directions during the later
sixteenth century. According to the authors of the manuals, manège equitation and
the airs above the ground thus required many characteristics of noble virtue but in a
context divorced from virtue’s original military framework. These authors also laud
the qualities of grace and what this study calls sprezzatura—a natural, nonchalant
ease of manner that masked the amount of effort required by a skilled and graceful
6
performance—as equally important to any successful mounted endeavor, and
especially to the airs relevés. These attributes only recently had been added to the
noble construct, but by the late sixteenth century they already were becoming
increasingly important components of what eventually would be a new belief system
about the meaning of nobility. Manège equitation and the airs above the ground thus
provided nobles with the means simultaneously to display the familiar but threatened
qualities of vertu and the less familiar but increasingly essential qualities of grace
and sprezzatura. Because this type of horsemanship provided avenues for the
display of all these noble attributes, both new and old, it served as a “bridge”
between the nobility’s old and increasingly obsolete self-perception and its emerging
new one.
5
By doing so, the movements of the manège helped ease the traditional
nobility’s transition from an anachronistic identity that clashed with its political,
military, social, and cultural contexts to an identity that was better suited and more
responsive to its actual circumstances, and thus helped the nobility not just to survive
but to flourish.
6
5
Horsemanship was one of the few activities in which nobles could exercise and display old and new
qualities of nobility at the same time. In contrast, many noble activities privileged either old qualities
(e.g., warfare, jousting) or new ones (e.g., dancing, witty conversation, a certain type of “culture”
resulting from new kinds of noble education). Fencing is another example of an activity that required
both old and new qualities and therefore may have served a similar bridging function in noble self-
perception and definition.
6
In addition to covering manège equitation and the airs above the ground, the manuals also discuss,
with varying degrees of detail, several mounted games that were popular during this period. Although
the same argument also could be made for these games, this study will focus primarily on the
movements of the manège. For additional information on the games, see chap. 2, “The Nobility’s
Response to the Challenges,” subsection “The Mounted Response,” especially the references listed in
n. 137, and subsection “Continuity and Change”; see also n. 210, below.
7
Historiography
The secondary literature that discusses the various challenges faced by the
traditional French nobility during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries is vast.
Much of the older scholarship portrays the nobility as sliding into a state of hopeless
decline, because of a combination of a rising bourgeoisie, a centralizing “absolute”
monarchy, the nobility’s dwindling financial resources, and its short-sighted refusal
to face reality and abandon its outdated belief system. Scholars espousing this
viewpoint based their interpretation to a great extent on literary evidence—tracts,
treatises, letters, memoirs, and various other documents written by the nobles
themselves. In these texts, the authors did indeed express their belief that nobility as
they understood it was in danger of extinction. The nobles blamed this state of
affairs on all the changes in social, political, and military structures that had occurred
in the recent past, and they insisted that the only way their order could be saved was
to eliminate all these new ideas and return to the old way of doing things. Based on
the assumption that the nobility’s rhetoric accurately reflected its reality, scholars
understandably arrived at the conclusion that the nobility was indeed in a state of
crisis, largely because it was so determined to retain its outdated beliefs that it
refused to make any of the changes needed to adapt to its environment.
7
7
Examples of this argument include Davis Bitton, The French Nobility in Crisis, 1560-1640
(Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1969); André Devyver, Le Sang épuré: Les Préjugés de
race chez les gentilshommes français de l’Ancien Régime (1560-1720) (Brussels: Editions de
l’Université de Bruxelles, 1973); Roland Mousnier, Les Institutions de la France sous la monarchie
absolue, 1598-1789, 2 vols. (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1974-1980). Bitton concludes
his book with a “Bibliographic Essay on the Economic Fortunes of the Nobility,” in which he cites
numerous other scholars whose work upholds the “crisis and decline” interpretation of the early
modern French nobility (French Nobility in Crisis, 168-174).
8
The crisis interpretation was based at least in part on the belief that the noble
order was irrevocably split between the new “robe” (civil or bureaucratic) nobility
and the old “sword” (hereditary and supposedly military) nobility. This thesis argues
that the two groups were diametrically opposed in terms of professional roles and
cultures, rural versus urban orientation, educational background, and sources of
wealth, and that they each practiced strictly endogamous marriage strategies. Like
the crisis interpretation, this conflictual view of the nobility was based largely on
subjective contemporary rhetoric rather than on objective archival data.
Both the belief that the traditional nobility was in a state of crisis and decline
and the belief that that state was triggered in part by a huge chasm dividing the old
nobility from the new have been debunked by more recent scholarship. This
research tends to draw on documented archival evidence of the actual economic,
political, military, and social circumstances of the nobility and of actual interactions
between new and old nobles: their marriage patterns, career choices, business
relationships, patron-client ties, and so forth. Scholars using this approach portray a
nobility that was neither stubbornly resistant to change nor sliding inexorably toward
obsolescence. Instead, their research shows that the nobility as a whole, far from
being in crisis or decline during this period, successfully adapted to its changing
circumstances and for the most part maintained its political power, economic
prosperity, and social dominance. This scholarship also has demonstrated that the
old nobles and the new ones, far from forming two distinct and mutually hostile
9
subcategories within the noble order, interacted and intermingled with one another at
a wide variety of levels, no matter what their rhetoric may have said to the contrary.
The revisionist interpretation initially was tested by scholars examining
specific and limited groups of nobles. Some of these studies focused on the nobles
of a particular locale, while others focused on a particular subset of the noble order
or on relationships that the nobility had with a particular group or institution.
8
As a
result of these detailed archival studies, it has become apparent that the revisionist
interpretation is the rule rather than the exception. Contrary to the complaints and
laments in their own rhetoric, nobles in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century France
generally weathered the storm of changes going on around them quite well.
9
The contradictory conclusions reached by scholars using archival and literary
sources have led some historians to question the latter’s validity as research material.
While it is true that the nobles’ subjective interpretations tend to present a distorted
8
Important local studies include, in chronological order: Jonathan Dewald, The Formation of a
Provincial Nobility: The Magistrates of the Parlement of Rouen, 1499-1610 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press, 1980); James B. Wood, The Nobility of the Election of Bayeux, 1463-1666:
Continuity through Change (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1980); William Beik,
Absolutism and Society in Seventeenth-Century France: State Power and Provincial Aristocracy in
Languedoc (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985); Donna Bohanan, Old and New Nobility
in Aix-en-Provence, 1600-1695: Portrait of an Urban Elite (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University
Press, 1992); James B. Collins, Classes, Estates, and Order in Early Modern Brittany (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1994). Studies of noble subgroups and/or relationships include Robert
R. Harding, Anatomy of a Power Elite: The Provincial Governors of Early Modern France (New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1978); J. Russell Major, From Renaissance Monarchy to Absolute
Monarchy: French Kings, Nobles, and Estates (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994).
9
On the nobility’s overall stability over time, see Major, Renaissance Monarchy, xiv-xv, 311-318;
Frederic J. Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century (New York: St. Martin’s, 1995), 260;
Arlette Jouanna, Le Devoir de révolte: La Noblesse française et la gestation de l’état moderne, 1559-
1661 (Paris: Fayard, 1989), 92-102; Jean-Pierre Labatut, Les Noblesses européennes de la fin du XV
e
siècle à la fin du XVIII
e
siècle (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1978), 126-127, 132-136.
Many scholars who reject the crisis-and-decline interpretation of the nobility as a whole during this
period do so because they are including new nobles in their assessments. When new nobles are
removed from the equation, the thesis that the nobility continued to march along virtually unfazed
becomes somewhat murkier, but in the long term it is correct.
10
picture of the actual circumstances and behavior of the majority of the nobility, their
writings remain useful for accessing the nobles’ ideals, beliefs, attitudes, and
collective mentalité about a wide range of issues of concern to them. For example,
several scholars have used literary sources to examine the group’s shifting beliefs
about the meaning of noblesse in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Their
research confirms that noble perceptions in this area had little to do with the actual,
legal definition of nobility, but these perceptions nonetheless offer a fascinating
perspective on the nobility that archival documents do not. Archival sources may
tell us what the nobles did, but only by examining their belief systems can we begin
to understand why they did what they did.
André Devyver, Arlette Jouanna, and Ellery Schalk each have examined an
enormous number of contemporary cahiers, tracts, treatises, pamphlets, memoirs,
letters, journals, poems, and other literature written by and about the French nobility
in order to identify beliefs that recur so frequently and over a sufficiently long period
of time that they can be said to represent the collective opinion of traditional nobles
about what defined noblesse. All three scholars identify as centrally important to the
nobles’ self-perception both military service and vertu—a range of supposedly
“noble” qualities that could be employed or displayed in various venues but that
found their fullest expression when a nobleman was performing an act of martial
valor.
Devyver and Jouanna interpret these sources in similar ways, although they
cover slightly different time periods: Jouanna focuses on the period from 1498 to
11
1614, and Devyver on that from 1560 to 1720.
10
Both scholars see military service
and vertu as requisite elements in the definition of nobility during the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries. Neither of them interpret their sources as saying that military
service was the sole profession or “function” of the nobility, but both indicate that
contemporaries clearly associated military service with noblesse and believed that
the “best” type of nobility included it. They differ somewhat in their readings of
contemporary beliefs regarding the role of virtue in the definition of nobility:
Devyver says only that contemporaries saw virtue as the “distinctive mark” of the
truly noble, whereas Jouanna interprets sixteenth-century texts as saying that vertu
was not just the key factor defining nobility but also the nobles’ “function.” Perhaps
because her focus is on the earlier period, Jouanna also stresses more than Devyver
the way in which contemporaries viewed the relationship between military service
and virtue: valor was seen as the highest form of vertu, and military service
therefore was the best showcase for it.
Both of these scholars emphasize the importance of birth as an element of
noblesse throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, but they also see an
increasing emphasis on noble ancestry over the period. Devyver dates this increase
10
Devyver, Sang épuré; Arlette Jouanna, Ordre social: Mythes et hiérarchies dans la France du XVI
e
siècle (Paris: Hachette, 1977). Although Devyver’s larger interpretation of the nobility’s
circumstances qualifies him as a “crisis” historian, his work remains valuable for other reasons. He
examines a large volume of primary texts and quotes from them extensively, and his descriptions of
the nobility’s beliefs regarding its own identity are still useful even if his conclusions regarding those
beliefs have proven to be incorrect. Although Jouanna has written many articles and several books
that touch on noble identity and self-perception, her most readily accessible statement on that topic is
Ordre social. This book is a condensed version of her three-volume doctoral dissertation, “L’Idée de
race en France au XVI
e
siècle et au début du XVII
e
siècle: 1498-1614” (thèse d’état, Université de
Paris IV, 1976), which, though harder to find than Ordre social, is invaluable for its analysis and
citation of a large number of primary texts.
12
to the 1560s, whereas Jouanna does not see a substantial change until the very late
sixteenth or early seventeenth century. Both of them, however, stress that all three
elements—military service, vertu, and ancestry—were important in contemporary
beliefs about nobility throughout the period; they simply were emphasized and
articulated in different ways. According to Devyver’s reading of the sources,
contemporaries believed that the “best” nobility always combined birth, virtue, and
military service and that, in such an ideal case, the three elements were so symbiotic
they became nearly synonymous. Despite an ongoing increase in the importance of
birth, this ideal endured in collective beliefs until well into the second half of the
seventeenth century. Finally, from around the mid-sixteenth century Jouanna notes
an increase in the importance of “natural” grace and cultured refinement as elements
defining noblesse.
11
In contrast to Devyver and Jouanna, Schalk’s interpretation of contemporary
beliefs leads him to argue that, for most of the sixteenth century, nobility was viewed
as a function or profession.
12
This function was a combination of military service
and virtue, with the latter depending directly from the former, largely because the
meaning of noble vertu in sixteenth-century texts was so specifically martial. Also
unlike Devyver and Jouanna, Schalk claims that noble ancestry played little or no
role in the nobility’s self-perception during the sixteenth century, and he concludes
11
Both Devyver and Jouanna also identify lifestyle (including not working or earning money, having
the leisure time necessary to “pursue” virtue, and enjoying noble privileges) and differentiation from
non- and recent nobles as important components of contemporary beliefs regarding the definition of
nobility. To this mix, Jouanna adds recognition by the social collective.
12
Ellery Schalk, From Valor to Pedigree: Ideas of Nobility in France in the Sixteenth and
Seventeenth Centuries (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1986).
13
that contemporaries believed that nobility was something one did—that is, fight and
be virtuous—rather than something one inherited. Toward the end of the century,
however, Schalk sees a radical shift in the nobles’ belief system, largely as a result of
the civil-religious wars in the second half of the sixteenth century. Once again
differing from Devyver and Jouanna, he maintains that, from the early seventeenth
century on, nobility no longer was defined by the profession of either warfare or
virtue. Military service was separated from noblesse and became something a
nobleman could choose to do (or not) rather than something that defined him, while
vertu ceased to play any role at all in noble identity and self-perception, or at least
was so de-emphasized that it became irrelevant. He concludes that henceforth
nobility was determined exclusively by noble ancestry. Finally, like Jouanna, Schalk
sees an increase in the importance of physical grace and “culture” in the noble
construct, although he dates the shift a bit later than she does. He specifically
situates these qualities as products of the académie, a new type of noble educational
institution available in France only from the very late sixteenth century on.
13
Schalk’s insistence that the French nobles responded to the accumulating
pressures of the late sixteenth century by jettisoning military service and martial
vertu as defining characteristics of nobility and rather abruptly adopting in their
place an identity based almost entirely on birth seems extreme. Although there
13
The only other element of noble definition to which Schalk gives much weight is noble privileges
or marques de noblesse, a category in which he includes grace and culture. He sees them as important
during the sixteenth century and claims that, once military service and virtue were dropped by the
early seventeenth century, they were the only thing besides noble birth that distinguished a nobleman
from a roturier.
14
definitely was a distinct increase during this period in the emphasis placed on noble
ancestry as a crucial quality of nobility, descent from noble parents always had been
the most fundamental determinant of noble status, even during periods when the
nobles seemed to privilege other elements. To argue that ancestry played no role in
noble beliefs about the meaning of noblesse for the entire sixteenth century thus
makes no sense. To further assume that birth displaced two of the qualities that had
been central components of noble identity for centuries is to gravely underestimate
the importance of tradition in noble culture. The sources examined by Devyver and
Jouanna indicate beyond any doubt that both military service and martial vertu
continued to play important roles in noble ideology throughout the seventeenth
century, even if the exact content of those roles was modified slightly to
accommodate the nobility’s changing circumstances. Because Schalk fails to see
these continuities and instead sees only the changes, he overemphasizes the increase
in the importance of birth and the decrease in that of military service and especially
of vertu, and he therefore posits an abrupt shift in noble self-perception and
definition that simply did not happen.
Other recent scholarship on the early modern French nobility has provided
further evidence that, during the seventeenth century and even beyond it, the
nobility’s views on what constituted noble identity were a blend of both continuity
and change. Nobles did not stubbornly refuse to adapt, as the old “nobility in crisis
and decline” school of thought used to argue, nor were they willing or able suddenly
to jettison longstanding beliefs and adopt a radically new sense of identity, as Schalk
15
has suggested. Instead, they adjusted and amended their ideas, a little here, a little
there, until—ultimately, gradually, and within the parameters that their belief system
allowed—they were able successfully to adapt their thinking to their changing
environment. Several recent monographs touch on the various ways in which the
early modern French nobility adapted to change while simultaneously maintaining its
traditions. They also discuss how those adaptations helped the nobility not just to
avoid its supposed crisis and decline but in fact to hold its ground and even prosper.
Kristen Neuschel, writing about the concept of honor in sixteenth-century
noble culture, speaks of simultaneous change and resistance to change in the
nobility’s beliefs and behaviors.
14
According to her argument, honor was a central
component of noble identity and ideology during the sixteenth century. By the
beginning of the seventeenth century, honor was still an important facet of noble
culture but largely had been relocated from actions and violence to words and
civility, as nobles very gradually transitioned—in both beliefs and behaviors—from
warriors operating in an oral culture to gentlemen operating in a written one. Honor
henceforth ceased to be one of the central components of noble identity and instead
became merely a personal quality of the individual nobleman, but it was by no means
dropped from the noble equation. This combination of continuity and change—of
the retention of a quality that had been central to the nobles’ ideas about noblesse for
centuries coupled with a sufficient reorientation of that quality to allow them to adapt
14
Kristen Neuschel, Word of Honor: Interpreting Noble Culture in Sixteenth-Century France (Ithaca,
NY: Cornell University Press, 1989).
16
to their changing environment—facilitated the nobility’s continued power and
importance in the seventeenth century.
Mark Motley examines the educational practices of the French court nobility
between 1580 and 1715.
15
He argues quite explicitly that these practices were a
combination of continuity and change and that it was the combination that allowed
this group of nobles to adapt and therefore to retain its position in society.
Aristocratic education served both the conservative role of maintaining a
social order based on birth and assertion of ‘natural’ aristocratic superiority
and the more dynamic role of fostering cultural changes that helped the
aristocracy maintain its power in a changing world.
16
Although he stresses that the court nobles consciously pursued a strategy of cultural
adaptation in order to retain their power and prestige, he also underlines that they did
so in ways that allowed them not to violate their existing belief system too
egregiously in the process. Their educational reforms incorporated older notions
about the relationship between pedigree and pedagogy with newer concerns about
preparing their sons for their role at court, thus allowing these aristocrats
simultaneously to retain cherished beliefs and to make the changes necessary to
continue to function effectively under the new demands of court life. Like Jouanna
and Schalk, Motley stipulates that one of these changes was a marked increase in the
need not only to be graceful at all times and no matter what the activity, but to be
15
Mark Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat: The Education of the Court Nobility, 1580-1715
(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990).
16
Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 7.
17
graceful in a sprezzata fashion—that is, one that concealed the labor that had gone
into achieving this level of grace.
17
Jonathan Dewald, covering the same time period as Motley, attempts to
situate the origins of modern culture in the experiences of French aristocrats.
18
Dewald argues that modern culture—and with it a modern concept of selfhood—
evolved from within traditional noble culture. As have so many other scholars,
Dewald points out that the nobility’s belief system in the seventeenth century
conflicted with the reality of its circumstances. This conflict created tensions and
contradictions, which in turn pushed the nobles to adapt by constructing a new
concept of self. This new self was in many ways more consonant with the nobility’s
reality, and the decrease in the dissonance between the nobles’ self-perception and
their social and political contexts allowed them not just to endure but to flourish.
Although this process may appear to be more about changes than continuities,
Dewald’s examples of the areas in which nobles showed supposedly “modern”
behaviors also underline the ways in which the nobility still was tied to its old
beliefs. The continuities lie in the origins of the change: modern culture came not
from outside but from within the existing culture.
17
“The key to social grace became to make art and learning appear effortless and natural.” Motley,
Becoming a French Aristocrat, 69.
18
Jonathan Dewald, Aristocratic Experience and the Origins of Modern Culture: France, 1570-1715
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993).
18
Jay M. Smith writes about the concept of merit in seventeenth- and
eighteenth-century French noble culture.
19
Like Motley, Smith is explicit about the
relationship between continuity and change and about the role that that relationship
played in the nobility’s adaptation and thus in its survival. His stated goals are to
“write a history of the French nobility that accounts both for its impressive
adaptability and for its adherence to established patterns” and “to suggest how
traditional concepts may coexist with and even spawn recognizably modern
concepts.”
20
He argues that noble ideology retained the longstanding characteristics
of merit and virtue as part of the definition of nobility while simultaneously
increasing the emphasis on the importance of birth. This was possible because
seventeenth-century nobles did not view ancestry and personal attributes as
contradictory concepts but rather saw them as intimately connected. As a result, the
nobility was able to adjust its thinking about noble identity and self-perception, but
in ways that did not violate its traditional beliefs. These adjustments allowed the
nobles to adapt to their changing circumstances, which ultimately allowed them to
retain their position in society throughout the rest of the ancien régime.
With the exception of Schalk, who argues primarily for change, the work of
all of these scholars supports this study’s argument that a combination of continuities
and changes in the nobility’s beliefs about the meaning of noblesse allowed the
nobles to adapt to their changing circumstances without completely abandoning their
19
Jay M. Smith, The Culture of Merit: Nobility, Royal Service, and the Making of the Absolute
Monarchy in France, 1600-1789 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1996).
20
Smith, Culture of Merit, 2, 4, respectively.
19
most cherished traditions. With the exception of Devyver, the sole “crisis” historian
in the group, these scholars also agree that this adaptation ultimately allowed the
traditional nobles to retain their position and importance in French society, politics,
and culture, rather than collapsing under the combined weight of the various
challenges they faced during the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries.
Neuschel, Motley, Smith, and (to a lesser extent) Dewald all make these same
general arguments. More specifically, Jouanna, Devyver, and Smith uphold this
study’s contention that one of the continuities in the nobility’s self-perception and
definition during the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century was the importance
of vertu, even as noble ancestry began to carry more weight in its belief system.
Smith in particular is very explicit that “the nobility’s heightened sense of ancestry in
the seventeenth century did not signal their flight from virtue.”
21
Jouanna, Schalk,
and especially Motley all note that one of the changes in the noble construct over the
same period was the growing importance of grace and sprezzatura.
22
Finally, all of
these scholars except Devyver conclude that the ability to adapt allowed the nobles
not only to hold their ground but to thrive.
Horsemanship facilitated all of these processes. By virtue of its longstanding
relationship not just with nobility in general but specifically with a nobleman’s
potential to manifest his martial vertu most gloriously while charging into battle on
21
Smith, Culture of Merit, 65.
22
With this one exception, Schalk, as noted, disagrees with this study’s thesis at virtually all major
points. His work nonetheless remains valuable to the discussion of the importance of military service
and virtue to the sixteenth-century noble construct and of birth and grace to the seventeenth-century
one, and his work is cited in those contexts.
20
his destrier, horsemanship was a key source of continuity in the context of the
nobles’ belief system about the meaning of noblesse. At the same time, as a result of
the new type of horsemanship the nobles began practicing in the late sixteenth
century, which provided an unparalleled platform for the display of a nobleman’s
grace and sprezzatura, it also was a dynamic source for change in noble self-
perception and definition. Because of this dual role, horsemanship helped the nobles
to adapt without violating their existing belief system. Ultimately, then,
horsemanship even contributed to helping the nobility to survive and prosper.
The examination of horsemanship thus adds a new facet to what other
scholars have said about the role of continuity and change in the nobility’s adaptation
and its survival. The manuals of horsemanship reveal the continued importance of
vertu in the nobles’ self-perception and definition, thus confirming that Schalk’s
thesis is not correct. They also reveal the growing emphasis on grace and
sprezzatura and thus the nobility’s willingness to adjust to unavoidable change,
further debunking the “crisis” interpretation and supporting the revisionist one.
Finally, in revealing the role played by all of these elements in early seventeenth-
century noble self-perception and definition, the manuals contribute to the recent
scholarship that argues that the successful adaptation of traditional nobles during this
period was partly a result of their ability to retain enough of their existing beliefs and
behaviors to be comfortable while simultaneously modifying or adding to them in
order to adjust to changes they simply could not avoid or escape.
21
Methodology
As indicated above, recent archival research shows that the early modern
French nobility as a whole did not experience major crisis or decline in most areas
and that old and new nobles interacted successfully at a variety of levels. Over the
same period, however, abundant literary evidence attests to the traditional nobility’s
belief that it was in serious trouble. Many nobles were convinced that their order
was in precipitous financial decline, that their political power and influence were
being usurped and overrun by newcomers, and that their social exclusivity was being
threatened by these same parvenus, while the manner in which nobles participated in
warfare (when they had an opportunity to do so) had changed in ways that many
nobles perceived as being to their detriment.
23
The fact that in the long run many of
these beliefs and perceptions proved to be either exaggerated or untrue does not
negate the fact that many nobles of the time were convinced of their essential
veracity.
23
For a representative sampling of these and other noble woes in the late sixteenth and early
seventeenth centuries, primarily as expressed in their cahiers des doléances for various Estates
General from 1560 to 1614, see Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 152, 161, 257-260,
263; Devyver, Sang épuré, 63-67, 78-83, 439-442; Major, Renaissance Monarchy, 105-106, 184-185,
327; Smith, Culture of Merit, 12-15, 49; Roger Chartier, “La Noblesse française et les états généraux
de 1614: Une Réaction aristocratique?” in Représentation et vouloir politiques: Autour des états
généraux de 1614, ed. Roger Chartier and Denis Richet (Paris: Editions de l’Ecole des Hautes Etudes
en Sciences Sociales, 1982), 116, 118-124; Jean-Marie Constant, “Absolutisme et modernité,” in
Histoire des élites en France du XVI
e
au XX
e
siècle: L’Honneur, le mérite, l’argent, ed. Guy
Chaussinand-Nogaret (Paris: Tallandier, 1991), 148-151, 156; Jean-Marie Constant, “Les Structures
sociales et mentales de l’anoblissement: Analyse comparative d’études récentes, XVI
e
-XVII
e
siècles,”
in L’Anoblissement en France, XV
e
-XVIII
e
siècles: Théories et réalités, comp. Centre de Recherches
sur les Origines de l’Europe Moderne de l’Université de Bordeaux III (Bordeaux: Maison des
Sciences de l’Homme d’Aquitaine, 1985), 53; Arlette Jouanna, “Des ‘Gros et gras’ aux ‘gens
d’honneur,’” in Histoire des élites en France, 66-67, 129; Arlette Jouanna, “Les Gentilshommes
français et leur rôle politique dans la seconde moitié du XVI
e
siècle et au début du XVII
e
,” Il Pensiero
Politico 10 (1977), 29-30, 38-39; Madeleine Lazard, Pierre de Bourdeille, seigneur de Brantôme
(Paris: Fayard, 1995), 12.
22
Although this study will in no way argue that the nobility actually was in
crisis or decline or that some huge chasm divided the noble order into two
diametrically opposed camps in any real way, the arguments it makes do privilege
the traditional nobles’ beliefs and perceptions. The study therefore does employ
literary sources, which are an invaluable resource for accessing noble belief systems.
At the same time, however, the limitations of such sources must be recognized and
acknowledged. As already noted, if literary materials are not complemented with
archival research, then the (often enormous) discrepancy between beliefs and
behaviors may go unnoticed. The relationship between perception and reality is
complex, and looking at the first without looking at the second almost certainly will
lead to incorrect assumptions or deductions regarding actual shifts in noble
behavior.
24
While all this is undeniable, the inverse is equally true: looking at
behaviors without looking at beliefs is to miss that part of noble “reality” that dwelt
almost entirely in the realm of the ideal. Ideal and real were intermingled and
influenced each other in a reciprocal fashion. Beliefs permeated the nobility’s
reasoning and therefore did influence its behavior.
25
The study of ideals and beliefs,
and how and why they changed over time, thus can shed light on real changes in
behavior. Several caveats, however, must be retained.
24
Jouanna, Ordre social, 10.
25
Jouanna, Devoir de révolte, 41; see also François Billacois, Le Duel dans la société française des
XVI
e
-XVII
e
siècles: Essai de psycho-sociologie historique (Paris: Editions de l’Ecole des Hautes
Etudes en Sciences Sociales, 1986), 8; Ellery Schalk, “The Appearance and Reality of Nobility in
France during the Wars of Religion: An Example of How Collective Attitudes Can Change,” Journal
of Modern History 48 (1976), 19-20.
23
First, shifts in the collective beliefs and behaviors of the traditional early
modern French nobility happened very slowly and largely at the unconscious level
and were the cumulative result of multiple instances of partial incorporation of new
ideas into existing belief systems.
26
New ideas thus had little if any immediate
impact on either the beliefs or the behaviors of the nobility as a whole. Second,
changes in actual behaviors were motivated by a wide range of factors, including but
certainly not limited to shifts in collective perceptions. The mere presence of new
ideas did not indicate change, either immediate or gradual, in either the beliefs or the
behaviors of the entire noble order.
Third, when shifts in collective beliefs did play a role in changes in actual
behaviors, the former often long predated the latter, and the behavioral change often
occurred only in a select subset of the nobility. Changes in collective behaviors did
not necessarily mirror changes in collective beliefs, as beliefs often represented an
ideal that the majority of the nobility had no chance of achieving. The effect of
beliefs on wider behaviors thus could be quite subtle, and the latter might never have
fully reflected the former in the noble order as a whole.
Fourth, any analysis of what the nobility as a collective entity thought or
believed is skewed by the sources on which it is based. Only a small number of
nobles were capable of leaving a written record of their beliefs; simply by virtue of
their literacy, they are less than representative of the “average” early modern French
noble. Of the minority capable of leaving a written record, an even smaller minority
26
Neuschel, Word of Honor, 21.
24
actually did so, thus further reducing the degree to which individual noble rhetoric is
representative of collective noble beliefs. At least some of those who left a written
record of their beliefs did so only because they felt strongly that something going on
around them was in need of addressing and were sufficiently exercised about it to
invest the necessary time and effort to record their views. As Orest Ranum points
out, many noble treatises and cahiers from the late sixteenth and early seventeenth
centuries could be seen as “propaganda by the second estate for the defense of
privilege.”
27
These texts, which were intended for public consumption, had so much
agenda attached to them that the beliefs and opinions they express therefore are just
as likely to reflect the exception as the rule.
Fifth, at least in part because these authors tended to be better educated than
the average noble, they also tended to be more aware of and concerned about
changes going on around them. Their views and—perhaps especially—their
suggestions for how the nobility ought to respond to such changes thus are less than
likely to represent actual, concurrent changes in the thinking of the collective. Sixth,
given that the views of their authors were less than representative of the views of the
noble collective, these sources are unlikely to reflect the actual practices of the group
as a whole and even less so to reflect changes in those practices.
Given all of the above, one must conclude that noble rhetoric can virtually
never be accepted at face value as representative of collective noble mentalité or of
changes in that mentalité; even less so can it be accepted as indicative either of the
27
Orest Ranum, review of The French Nobility in Crisis, 1560-1640, by Davis Bitton, American
Historical Review 75 (1970): 1122-1123.
25
actual behavior of the nobility as a whole or of changes in that behavior.
28
A
concrete example of these conclusions is the proposal for noble educational
institutions and their curricula outlined by François de la Noue in his Discours
politiques et militaires (1585),
29
an example borrowed from Kristen Neuschel. She
argues that, because La Noue was an atypical example of the noble collective at the
time he wrote the Discours, what he has to say cannot be accepted as indicative of
the beliefs of the majority of his peers, and his suggestions for how to fix the
problems plaguing the nobility definitely cannot be accepted as indicative of any
actual behavior on their part.
30
There is indeed evidence that a substantial proportion
of the traditional French nobility ca. 1585 was uneducated (and may even have
disdained education), so Neuschel is correct in saying that La Noue’s opinions on
noble education did not reflect those of most other nobles. Certainly no educational
system such as La Noue describes existed in the late 1580s, so she also is correct in
saying that we cannot assume that La Noue’s call for better education for nobles
reflected or implied the concurrent establishment of the type of schools he proposed.
On the other hand, the proposals of La Noue and other “atypical” nobles of
like mind, such as Pierre d’Origny and Jean de Saulx,
31
did have an impact on the
28
On the perils of assuming that beliefs, as expressed in literary sources, have a direct relationship to
behaviors, see Neuschel, Word of Honor, 10-11, 202-204, 205 n. 33.
29
François de la Noue, “De la Bonne Nourriture & institution qu’il est necessaire de donner aux
jeunes gentils-hommes françois,” discourse 5 in Discours politiques et militaires (Basel: François
Forest, 1587; reprint, ed. F. E. Sutcliffe, Geneva: Droz, 1967; page references are to 1967 ed.).
30
Neuschel, Word of Honor, 202-205.
31
Pierre d’Origny, Le Hérault de la noblesse de France (Reims: Jean de Foigny, 1578; reprint, Paris:
J. B. Dumoulin, 1875; page references are to 1875 ed.); Jean de Saulx, preface, Mémoires de très-
noble & très-illustre Gaspard de Saulx, seigneur de Tavannes … [ca. 1610], in Nouvelle Collection
26
beliefs and behaviors of at least the upper echelons of the nobility within a relatively
short period of time. Schools for nobles—académies—did appear, and noble
education did improve, beginning around the mid-1590s. These institutions were
extremely expensive and therefore remained accessible only to that segment of the
nobility that could afford them, so one cannot justifiably claim that in this case the
beliefs of the few resulted in easily identifiable changes in the beliefs and behaviors
of the many. To argue, however, that the beliefs of the few were completely
unrelated to changes in the beliefs and behaviors of the many is equally unjustifiable.
If we consider that those most likely to attend one of the académies—high or court
nobles—usually served as a model for the larger collective, and if we look at changes
in the beliefs and behaviors of that collective far enough into the future, then we
almost certainly will be able to discern an influence of some kind on noble education
more broadly.
32
A number of scholars have fallen into precisely the trap outlined by
Neuschel, by claiming certain beliefs and even behaviors on the part of the many
based solely on literary sources representing the beliefs of the few.
33
Jonathan
Dewald, for example, argues that both the private writings and some of the practices
of what he readily admits is a tiny segment of the nobility—“the wealthiest and most
des mémoires relatifs à l’histoire de France depuis le XIII
e
siècle jusqu’à la fin du XVIII
e
siècle, ed.
Joseph Fr. Michaud and Jean Joseph François Poujoulat, ser. 1, vol. 8 (Paris: Didier, 1854).
32
An example of this sort of long-range influence readily can be seen in the case of table manners. If
the behaviors of the court nobility had had no impact at all on the behaviors of others, then many
people in France still would be eating with their fingers rather than with forks.
33
In addition to the scholars discussed here, Neuschel, Word of Honor, 205 n. 33, charges Schalk,
Jouanna, and Devyver with equating or conflating noble beliefs, as expressed in their literary output,
with “the actual process of social and political change.”
27
articulate nobles, those most closely attached to Paris and the royal court”—reveal
ideas and attitudes that conflicted with traditional noble ideology. The resulting
cultural tensions steadily increased throughout the seventeenth century, ultimately
causing these nobles to doubt the value of their existing belief system and thus to
develop modern values, especially the notion of the modern self. Because the group
whose writings he has studied “exercised an influence on the rest of society out of
proportion to its numbers,” Dewald argues that this radical shift in ideas and
practices also applies to the nobility as a whole and even to society in general,
because “the nobility embody in acute form a problem that many participants in early
modern culture shared.” Despite his open acknowledgement of the pitfalls of using
the literary output of a select few to access the beliefs and behaviors of the many,
Dewald then proceeds to ignore his own warnings. Ultimately, he argues that the
radical shift in both beliefs and behaviors needed to propel society into modernity
may be deduced from a narrow category of literary sources produced by a narrow
segment of the nobility.
34
Even if the beliefs and behaviors of that segment of the
nobility did serve as a model for the beliefs of the rest of the nobility, the private
writings of these nobles certainly do not reflect the concurrent beliefs, let alone the
concrete behaviors, of the nobility as a whole, let alone society in general. Given the
fact that these documents were written for personal rather than public consumption,
they may not even reflect the beliefs or behaviors of other members of this select
34
Dewald, preface, introduction, and conclusion, Aristocratic Experience; quotes from 1. Dewald
claims to use a combination of literary and archival sources to support his argument, yet his
bibliography of primary sources shows nothing in the latter category.
28
group of nobles, especially if the ideas and practices they describe are as
revolutionary as Dewald claims.
Jay M. Smith says that his goal is to analyze the traditional nobility’s
discourse in order to trace the long-term evolution in its beliefs regarding the
meaning of merit and then to relate that perceptual evolution to concrete changes in
its social and especially its political conditions. Smith makes it abundantly clear that
he is basing his argument almost entirely on the nobles’ language. Although he does
consult archival documents as well as literary sources, he apparently mines the
former solely for what they reveal about the evolution of noble attitudes toward
merit. To make his argument, Smith therefore must assume that the beliefs of the
limited number of nobles who produced texts revealing their views on the meaning
of merit reflect the beliefs of the entire collective, that the beliefs these authors
articulate in their texts reflect actual behaviors of the nobility as a whole, and that the
shifts in the noble belief system that these texts seem to indicate correlate to changes
in the behaviors of the group. Unlike Dewald, Smith never even acknowledges the
problems inherent in this approach. He offers only a vague and implicit defense of
the use of literary sources to access collective beliefs by noting the large number of
texts saying the same things over a significant period of time, and he offers no
defense whatsoever for using literary sources to access collective behaviors or
changes in collective behaviors.
35
35
Smith, “Merit, Nobility, and the French State” and “Merit and the Personal Modality of Service,”
introduction and chap. 1, respectively, in Culture of Merit.
29
Not all scholars who rely on literary sources to support their arguments
succumb to these temptations. For example, Mark Motley uses the beliefs and
behaviors of the court nobility—the same group studied by Dewald—as the basis for
his argument. In contrast to both Dewald and Smith, however, Motley does not
claim that the theories or practices of the small subset he studies are indicative of
those of the nobility as a whole. He is in fact very explicit that his study applies only
to the educational theories and practices of the court nobles and that “the actual
extent to which the robe nobility or the poorer provincial nobles were willing and
able to emulate the educational program of the aristocracy remains an unresolved
question.” He even acknowledges the differences that could exist within the court
nobility, although he then goes on to argue that its members shared more
commonalities than disparities in order to support his claim that the educational
theories and practices of the court nobles whom he actually examines may be taken
as indicative of those of the court nobility more generally.
36
This argument is far
more acceptable (and potentially accurate) than one that claims that the beliefs and
behaviors of a small and select subset of the nobility are indicative of those of the
entire collective or even of society in general.
Unlike Dewald and Smith, this study will not be arguing that the literary
output of a select segment of the nobility reflected changes in collective beliefs,
concurrent collective behaviors, or changes in collective behaviors. Unlike Motley,
on the other hand, its claims are not limited to the narrow segment of the nobility to
36
Motley, introduction and conclusion, Becoming a French Aristocrat; quote from 210.
30
which the authors of its primary sources belonged. Instead, this study will focus on
two concepts: first, that the beliefs of the minority could and did lead to changes in
the beliefs of the majority; and second, that literary sources therefore eventually
would and did reflect the beliefs of the many.
In support of the first claim, many scholars have noted that the beliefs of the
high nobility, as expressed in literary sources written by and about this select subset
of the noble order, tended gradually to trickle down to and influence the beliefs of
other nobles.
37
The upper echelons of the nobility were more likely than the vast
majority to have received sufficient education to leave a written account of their
views, to be concerned about the social and political changes going on around them,
and to attend court and therefore be exposed to and even participate in changes in
beliefs and behaviors going on among their peers. Over time, exposure to new ideas,
either written or verbal, as well as to new practices inevitably would affect both the
beliefs and the behaviors of this select group, which in turn—eventually—would
influence the beliefs (though not necessarily the actual behaviors) of those further
down the noble ladder. The ideal to which the top crust aspired in practice
37
On the court and the nobles who circulated there as a model for the rest of the nobility and elite
society in general, see Dewald, Aristocratic Experience, 1; Labatut, Noblesses européennes, 160;
Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 5; Jeroen Duindam, Myths of Power: Norbert Elias and the
Early Modern European Court, trans. Lorri S. Granger and Gerard T. Moran (Amsterdam:
Amsterdam University Press, 1994), 162, 164; Robert Muchembled, L’Invention de l’homme
moderne: Culture et sensibilités en France du XV
e
au XVIII
e
siècle (Paris: Fayard, 1994), 239, 383-
384, 424; Robert Muchembled, Société, cultures et mentalités dans la France moderne: XVI
e
-XVIII
e
siècle, 2
nd
ed. (Paris: Armand Colin, 1994), 154.
31
eventually would become the ideal to which the entire order would subscribe in
belief.
38
Support for the second claim—that literary sources eventually came to reflect
collective beliefs—has to do both with timing and with broader cultural constructs.
In terms of timing, if an individual author is expressing ideas or suggesting actions
that, at the date he was writing, represent a significant break with the thinking and
practices of most of his peers, then that particular text obviously will not be a reliable
indicator of the views (let alone the behaviors) of the collective. On the other hand,
if numerous texts of many different types express the same general beliefs over a
relatively long period of time, then it becomes much safer to assume that they reflect
the views of at least a substantial number of the collective. In a case such as this, the
beliefs and behaviors of the few first helped to shape and then later reflected at least
the beliefs of the collective, even if they did not always (or even usually) shape or
reflect collective behaviors. As long as the timing is kept in mind, making
generalized assumptions about the beliefs of the nobility as a whole based on the
beliefs and behaviors of a technically “unrepresentative” segment of the group thus
is less unreasonable than might be thought.
As for broader cultural trends, the fact that shifts in collective noble beliefs
took place very gradually and largely unconsciously and that they were motivated by
a wide variety of factors already has been noted. Precisely because the process of
38
It is important to acknowledge that the court nobility during this period was beginning to grow
away from the petty and middling provincial nobility. In the early seventeenth century, however,
their differences had not yet created the mutual hostility that would come later.
32
change is slow and uneven, literary sources, while they undeniably reveal the
individual beliefs of their authors, also must reflect the era in which their authors
lived and therefore at some level must reflect the beliefs—if not necessarily the
behaviors—of the authors’ peers: one cannot escape one’s time and place entirely,
no matter how exceptional or unrepresentative one may be.
39
As a result, even when
the authors and texts in question are part of the leading edge of a shift in beliefs,
these sources still provide at least an entrée into the collective mentalité of the
author’s time.
This study relies on five manuals of horsemanship to support its argument
about the role of manège equitation in shifting noble beliefs. These texts were
written during the period when the traditional nobility’s beliefs about the meaning of
noblesse were in transition, and they all reveal, at varying levels of complexity,
changing ideas about noble self-perception and definition. In chronological order
based on the publication date of each book’s first edition, the sources are La Broue’s
Cavalerice françois of 1593-1594, Menou’s Pratique du cavalier of 1612, La Noue’s
Cavalerie françoise et italienne of 1620, Pluvinel’s Instruction du Roy of 1625, and
Delcampe’s Art de monter à cheval of 1658. For some of the more esoteric
equestrian terms, Guillet’s dictionary, Les Arts de l’homme d’epée of 1680, also is
used.
40
39
Neuschel, Word of Honor, 203.
40
In some cases first editions were not available and/or were missing potentially useful material that
was added to a later revised edition. The editions actually consulted are as follows: Salomon de la
Broue, Le Cavalerice françois, contenant les preceptes principaux qu’il faut observer exactement
pour bien dresser les chevaux …, 2
nd
rev. exp. ed. (Paris: Abel l’Angelier, 1602 [book 1] and 1608
33
The manuals all were written by noble riding instructors, a very small and
highly specialized subset of the noble collective. The stated purpose of these books
was to supplement the mounted instruction of those who were learning to ride and
train horses in the intricacies of the manège. With the exception of Pierre de la
Noue, all of the authors taught at a Parisian académie, at the royal court, or both, so
their students were virtually all court nobles—another small and very select subset of
the noble collective. La Noue taught manège horsemanship in the provinces, so his
students also would have come from a similarly narrow segment of the group: even
outside the capital, only the wealthiest and most elite members of the nobility could
afford the time and expense needed to master the type of horsemanship described in
the manuals. The audience for whom these books were intended therefore was court
nobles or very highly placed provincial nobles.
It seems safe to assume that, at least in terms of the subject matter of these
books, the instructor-authors and their pupil-readers shared a common set of beliefs
and behaviors. This study will not argue, however, that what these texts say about
the horse-related opinions and activities of this select group of nobles tells us
anything about some future belief system of the nobility in general, let alone some
future group practice. There is, in fact, little concrete evidence that manège
[books 2 and 3]); René de Menou de Charnizay, La Pratique du cavalier, ou L’Exercice de monter à
cheval …, rev. exp. ed. (Paris: Guillaume & Jean Baptiste Loyson, 1650); Pierre de la Noue, La
Cavalerie françoise et italienne, ou L’Art de bien dresser les chevaux, selon les preceptes des bonnes
écoles des deux nations … (Strasbourg: Jac. de Heyden, 1620); Antoine de Pluvinel, L’Instruction du
Roy en l’exercice de monter à cheval … (Paris: Michel Nivelle, 1625); Delcampe [no first name
given], L’Art de monter à cheval: qui monstre la belle & facille methode de se rendre bon homme de
cheval …, 2
nd
rev. exp. ed. (Paris: Jacques le Gras, 1664). The first edition of La Broue’s treatise
appeared under a slightly variant title, Preceptes principaux que les bons cavalerices doivent
exactement observer … pour bien dresser les chevaux…. For Guillet, see n. 2, above.
34
equitation ever became one of the defining characteristics in the new collective belief
system about the meaning of nobility, which was still in the process of forming when
La Broue’s Cavalerice françois, the earliest manual used in this study, was published
in 1593-1594.
41
What is interesting about these manuals is their subtext, which has less to do
with horses than with the continuities and changes in the nobility’s collective self-
perception and definition. The beliefs about the meaning of noblesse that are
revealed through the prism of these books’ actual subject matter were not entirely
new ideas. Those that reflected continuities (the role of military service and martial
virtue in defining nobility) had been part of the noble belief system for well over a
century, but even the ideas that reflected change (the role of grace and sprezzatura)
had first begun to have an impact—at least on the beliefs and subsequently the
behaviors of the court nobility—decades before the appearance of Le Cavalerice
françois.
Earlier in this Introduction, manuals of horsemanship were termed a rich
resource for better understanding the nobility’s response to the various military,
political, social, and cultural changes that threatened its beliefs about the meaning of
noblesse. The threatening changes referred to in that statement—the declining
relevance of heavy cavalry, the growth of a new type of nobility that had nothing to
do with military service, the related changes in the way virtue was defined, the
41
Without first making a comprehensive study of all contemporary sources that refer to the place of
manège equitation in noble ideology, trying to demonstrate that this type of horsemanship became a
key component of noble self-perception and definition is impossible.
35
increasing need for more polished social behaviors—all were well underway by the
middle of the sixteenth century. Noticeable changes in the nobility’s self-perception
and definition, which occurred as part of its response to these threats, begin to appear
in select noble rhetoric by the 1560s and 1570s. The evidence at that point obviously
reflected only the views of the few. By the end of the sixteenth century, however,
the shift in ideology had trickled down sufficiently that it is detectable in a much
broader range of texts, including the earliest of the manuals of horsemanship used in
this study.
Because all the riding masters were closely affiliated with the upper echelons
of the nobility or even with members of the court nobility itself, the authors of the
earliest manuals were exposed more directly than most nobles to the shift toward
more refined thinking and behavior. Their texts already attest to changes in noble
self-perception and definition, from an identity that revolved around military service
and martial vertu to one that placed more emphasis on a certain type of culture and
that lauded the qualities of grace and sprezzatura. At this stage in the nobility’s still-
evolving beliefs about the meaning of noblesse, it could be argued that the views
expressed in these texts reflected the views of the court nobility more than those of
the collective. By the time Delcampe’s Art de monter à cheval appeared in 1658,
however, the texts that attested to this shift had become so numerous and varied that
it would be difficult to argue that they did not represent the beliefs of at least a
substantial number of the noble collective. Given that all five manuals say very
similar things about the qualities of nobility over a period of more than sixty years,
36
even the earliest manual therefore must reflect at least the nascent stages of
collective belief.
All of which begs the question: why manuals of horsemanship? If the
primary interest of these books is their subtext, which is not about horsemanship but
about noble identity, then why choose these manuals over the myriad other types of
texts (many of them already explored by other scholars) that tell us similar things?
What do manuals of horsemanship tell us about noble self-perception and definition
that other sources do not? Unlike most other sources, the manuals articulate the
relationship between changing noble beliefs and a specific noble activity that was
itself an agent of that change, because it lent itself as few other activities did or could
to the simultaneous display of both existing and emerging qualities of nobility.
These texts therefore highlight with particular clarity the fact that the shift in notions
of noble identity was possible only because it took place through the retention of
certain old beliefs while simultaneously allowing new beliefs to develop and
spread.
42
Manège equitation, and particularly the airs above the ground, bridged the
old and new belief systems about the meaning of noblesse, largely because the horse
itself played a key role in both systems. Military prowess and martial virtue were
displayed best in battle, and the type of military service considered most appropriate
for a nobleman was indubitably the heavy cavalry. This activity obviously required
a horse, specifically a warhorse or destrier. Grace and sprezzatura could be
displayed in a variety of contexts, but demonstrating them while performing the
42
Again, fencing is another noble activity that meets these criteria, and fencing manuals may merit
further investigation in this specific context.
37
complex maneuvers of the manège was among the most challenging and thus among
the most prized. This activity also required a horse, in this case one that could
perform with an ease and grace to match that of its human partner—a veritable
equine danseur.
43
In the context of noble identity, the analogy between destrier and danseur
can be taken yet further. In terms of actual practice, only a tiny number of nobles
were involved in either cavalry service or manège equitation. At no point from the
mid-fifteenth century forward did more than a very small percentage of noblemen
actually serve in the military, a fact attested to by a substantial body of scholarship.
Nonetheless, the belief that the qualities embodied by the mounted warrior were the
quintessence of nobleness is overwhelmingly apparent in sixteenth-century sources.
Although those sources, being written, in theory represent only a small and select
segment of the nobility and its beliefs, the cumulative number and variety of texts
expressing similar ideas indicate that this belief was held by most if not all of the
noble collective. The relationship between reality, ideology, and manège equitation
is similar. Just as the petty noble of ca. 1550 in most cases never had any actual,
lived relationship to heavy cavalry service, so the petty noble of ca. 1650 never had
one to manège equitation. That did not, however, prevent him from believing, just
like his earlier counterpart, that the qualities embodied by the mounted courtier were
43
The similarity between the manège horse and a human dancer is noted by several authors; see
Marie-Christine Mégret-Lacan, “Naissance de l’art équestre,” XVII
e
siècle, no. 204 (1999), 545; Alois
Podhajsky, The Complete Training of Horse and Rider in the Principles of Classical Horsemanship,
trans. Eva Podhajsky and V. D. S. Williams (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967), 277; Helen
Watanabe-O’Kelly, “New Horses and New Horsemanship in the Sixteenth Century,” in Triumphall
Shews: Tournaments at German-Speaking Courts in Their European Context, 1560-1730 (Berlin:
Mann, 1992), 70.
38
the quintessence of nobleness. Here, too, the number and variety of sources that
attest to this belief make it clear that this ideal eventually permeated early modern
noble self-perception and definition just as thoroughly as the earlier ideal had
permeated its late medieval corollary.
The role of horsemanship in early modern French noble identity thus is both
insignificant and profound. Viewed from the perspective of behavior alone, manège
equitation was practiced only by the highest echelons of the nobility. If its only
impact had been to help this select group to transition from a medieval warrior-
knight identity to an early modern courtier-aristocrat one, then the role of
horsemanship in noble self-perception and definition indeed would have been
negligible. When viewed from the perspective of beliefs, on the other hand,
horsemanship had a profound impact on the nobility as a whole. Manège equitation
and the airs above the ground only had to serve the function for which this study
argues in the narrow confines of that segment of the nobility that was and always had
been the genesis of notions of noble identity. By the time new notions about the
meaning of noblesse reached the rural hobereau, actual practice had little or nothing
to do with the belief system. The vast majority of nobles were more affected by the
end product—in this case, the shift away from the highly militarized but virtuous
model of nobility that prevailed in the early sixteenth century, and toward the
refined, mannered, cultured, graceful, “civilized” model of nobility that prevailed by
the end of the seventeenth century—than they were by the actual means by which the
high and court nobility got from one model to the other. The means in this case
39
certainly were not limited to horsemanship, but the latter did play a crucial role
because it permitted those who practiced it to display old and new aspects of their
identity simultaneously. Manège equitation thus was a particularly useful vehicle for
the shift of beliefs about noble identity in its initial stages among the court nobility,
whence the beliefs (but not the vehicle itself) spread to the collective.
But what of the interplay between beliefs and behaviors, between ideal and
real, referred to earlier? The fact that this study is using the manuals only to access
beliefs, not behaviors, already has been emphasized, and the fact that literary sources
alone cannot be used to access noble behaviors without the complement of archival
research already has been conceded. Yet this study also has stated that the shift in
the nobility’s beliefs about the meaning of noblesse had a very real, concrete result:
it allowed the nobles to adapt to their changing circumstances, and thereby allowed
them not just to endure but to thrive. Fortunately, there is ample evidence, supported
by the archival research of other scholars, that the traditional early modern French
nobles did indeed adapt, survive, and flourish well beyond the period covered by this
study. When the study makes connections between the nobility’s ideology and its
concrete reality, such assessments therefore are made in light of recent scholarship
dealing with both aspects—real and ideal—of the history of the early modern French
nobility. Some of this scholarship relies primarily on archival documents, some of it
leans more heavily on literary sources, and some of it uses both. When this study
argues that the nobles’ self-perception and definition shifted over time, it relies on
scholarship about noble beliefs, primarily as expressed in literary sources (including
40
manuals of horsemanship). When it argues that that shift helped the nobles to adapt
and thus to function more effectively in a changing environment, it relies on
scholarship about noble behaviors, primarily as uncovered through archival research.
Finally, a word about the difficulties inherent in using any type of document,
be it archival or literary, to access the world of the early modern French nobility.
Whether examining noble reality or perceptions, it is crucial not to “read back”
modern ideas or assumptions onto either the beliefs or the behaviors of these
individuals. Doing so affects analysis and interpretation in various ways. First, the
process of cultural change is very gradual, quite complex, and limited by the culture
in which it takes place: change occurs, but only in the way its cultural context can
allow it to occur. Modern assessments of changes in the nobility’s beliefs or
behaviors thus must be careful not to evaluate those changes based on criteria that
either did not yet exist or only then were beginning to emerge.
44
Second, contradictions existed in early modern French noble culture, but—
again—only to the extent that that culture could allow them to exist.
45
Historians
will have difficulty deciphering noble beliefs and behaviors until they understand
that, in the nobles’ cultural context, concepts such as material and perceptual, real
and ideal, tended to blur and overlap in ways totally foreign to the modern mind. In
modern culture, ideal and real tend to be seen as oppositional and contradictory, but
assuming that “ideal” and “real” were competing drives for early modern noble
beliefs or behaviors is to construe reality in modern terms. The content of both these
44
Neuschel, Word of Honor, 21, 196.
45
Neuschel, Word of Honor, 20-21.
41
notions was very different in early modern noble culture; they were neither mutually
exclusive nor opposing categories. Attempting to apply this sort of dichotomy to
early modern noble beliefs and behaviors thus is not useful, because the conflict that
the modern mind sees as inherent in these terms often either did not trouble these
men or simply was not perceived as contradictory by them.
46
Third, early modern French nobles not only had different beliefs regarding
the meaning of ideal and real but also perceived the relationship between ideal and
real, between beliefs and behaviors, in ways totally foreign to the modern mind.
Both the beliefs themselves and, perhaps even more so, the logic or rationale behind
those beliefs will be misunderstood if we assume that what looks familiar is familiar.
Expecting early modern nobles to think or behave in ways that the modern mind
considers to be rational forces us either to conclude that the nobles were hopelessly
irrational or to miss entirely the logic that did exist behind noble beliefs and
behaviors. Either one or both of these can lead to inaccurate or inadequate
explanations of why nobles did and thought what they did and thought. In order to
be understood, early modern noble logic thus must be approached on early modern
noble terms.
47
This final warning about the dangers of reading one’s own cultural construct
into the cultural construct of previous eras is particularly applicable to this study,
46
On the importance of not reading back modern ideas onto early modern ones and, as a result, seeing
contradictions and oppositional dichotomies where in fact there is compatibility or even synonymy,
see Dewald, Aristocratic Experience, 10; Neuschel, Word of Honor, 14-15, 21, 197, 202; Smith,
Culture of Merit, 17, 62, 64.
47
For some insights into noble “logic,” or the rationale behind beliefs and behaviors in certain areas
of noble culture, and on the risks of assuming familiarity where in fact none exists, see Neuschel,
Word of Honor, 18, 19-20, 196; Smith, Culture of Merit, 29-31, 62-64.
42
because it deals with not one construct but two: that of nobles and that of horses.
Horses did not and do not exist in a cultural vacuum; there is no unchanging equine
“constant” that transcends time and place. Evidence of this can be seen today in the
huge changes in what is and is not “fashionable” in the modern dressage horse—an
animal that in many respects is the direct descendant of the equine danseurs of the
early modern French nobles. Because of texts such as the manuals used for this
study, it is relatively easy to follow changes in horsemanship: the training
techniques, the position of the rider, even the attitudes toward the horse as an object
of training all are described in sufficient detail to see change over time. Changes in
the horse itself, however, are revealed only obliquely by these sources. We therefore
must be particularly careful not to make assumptions about early modern horses
based on our knowledge of their modern counterparts.
43
PART 1: THE NOBLE CONTEXT
The overall goal of this study is to demonstrate the crucial role played by
horses and horsemanship in the gradual restructuring of traditional early modern
French noble self-perception and definition by showing the ways in which manège
equitation and the airs above the ground helped to facilitate the nobility’s transition
from an obsolete warrior-knight identity to a more relevant and effective courtier-
aristocrat identity. First, however, it is necessary to contextualize the place of
horsemanship in that transition by briefly reviewing the broader military, political,
social, and cultural factors that combined to create a need for the nobles to reevaluate
their existing self-perception and definition in the first place. To that end, Chapter
One will summarize the way in which the nobles themselves defined noblesse for
most of the sixteenth century, as well as the threats and challenges to certain
elements of their belief system that arose over the course of that century. Chapter
Two then will explore the nobility’s reaction to those threats and challenges, first in a
general sense and then more specifically in terms of horsemanship, at which point
the study returns to its central focus.
44
CHAPTER 1
Noble Definition and Its Challenges
The Definition of Nobility
Before embarking on a description of the early modern French nobility’s
belief system about the meaning of noblesse, it is important to reiterate that the
“definition” of nobility used in this study is based on a set of collective and
subjective beliefs rather than on objective material reality. In reality, noble status
was based either on established noble ancestry (for old nobles) or on legitimate
ennoblement (for new ones). In the eyes of the law, new and old nobles were
essentially equal, especially in terms of rights and privileges.
48
Traditional nobles
tended to believe, however, that “true” nobility—that is, nobility as they defined and
supposedly embodied it—was founded on largely personal attributes, which had little
or nothing to do with the legal status of the individual in question. The nobility’s
collective beliefs regarding these personal qualities form the core of this study.
Applying or assuming a “norm” for the traditional nobility’s collective
beliefs about the meaning of noblesse admittedly has inherent pitfalls, since there
always will be exceptions and variations to any such norm. The work of Jonathan
Dewald on Rouen, James B. Wood on Bayeux, Donna Bohanan on Aix-en-Provence,
and James B. Collins on Brittany demonstrates that the documented behaviors of
nobles whose orientation was more urban sometimes differed from those of their
48
For an excellent synopsis of the “real” definition of nobility at this time, see Wood, Nobility of
Bayeux, 12-14.
45
more traditional, landed counterparts.
49
On the other hand, behaviors and beliefs
often differ; assuming beliefs based solely on the evidence of behaviors is not
necessarily more likely to yield accurate assessments than assuming behaviors based
solely on beliefs. In this case, the cumulative evidence of a wide variety of literary
sources, expressing similar views over a substantial period of time, indicates a fairly
uniform set of beliefs across the majority of the nobility, regardless of the individual
behaviors of those falling outside the norm. It should not be forgotten that the nobles
who produced these texts, no matter how exceptional they may have been when
compared to the “average” noble, had to reflect the era in which they lived, and their
views therefore had to reflect to at least some extent the cultural beliefs of the time.
When all of these factors—the number and variety of sources, the span of time over
which they were written, and their broader cultural context—are added together, it
suggests that the belief system expressed by these texts was indeed representative of
a collective group mentalité.
50
Numerous other historians of early modern French
noble culture make the same argument, stressing the coherency of noble beliefs
across the entire order.
51
49
For example, in the parts of France studied by these scholars, a noble family of ancient and
prestigious lineage might have a tradition of service in the royal judiciary rather than in the military.
50
Schalk, “Appearance and Reality,” 23 n. 12, not only agrees with this assumption but argues for its
validity for society in general. Speaking of the meaning of noblesse as expressed in contemporary
sources, he says: “It is obviously extremely difficult to identify opinions from written texts. One
must know the context well, and it is always possible that the writer may have some particular hidden
motives for arguing as he does. But since this view seems to have been commonly accepted among
all segments of society—old nobles, new ones, non-noble members of the robe, and other non-
nobles—it seems safe to accept it as a common … assumption of the society at large.”
51
See, for example, Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 6; Neuschel, Word of Honor, 16; Smith,
Culture of Merit, 3, 7, 62, 89; David Parrott, “Richelieu, the Grands, and the French Army,” in
Richelieu and His Age, ed. Joseph Bergin and Laurence Brockliss (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1992), 142. Labatut, Noblesses européennes, 55-56, makes a further point bearing on traditional
46
Ironically, at the beginning of the sixteenth century, the single most important
determinant of noble status was not a belief but a fact. For traditional nobles,
ancestry was the factor that most definitively separated those who were noble from
those who were not.
52
Members of the traditional French nobility tended to believe,
however, that various other factors were equally if not more important in
distinguishing nobles from commoners. In their view, a legitimate nobleman
enjoyed the right to certain privileges, led a certain type of lifestyle, participated in
certain types of activities, and behaved in a certain fashion, any or all of which could
serve this differentiating purpose.
By the sixteenth century, French nobles enjoyed a wide range of both legally
mandated privileges and purely customary perks. Nobles were legally exempt from
paying most types of taxes and certain other fees; they benefited from preferential
judicial treatment and special inheritance laws; and in some cases they enjoyed
economic rights related to the land they owned, such as the collection of rents, taxes,
and labor or the revenues from judicial and administrative activities. At least in
theory, these privileges originally had been granted in exchange for the nobles’
noble families whose career choices fell outside the norm for which this study argues. He notes that
some noble families devoted themselves solely to careers in the military and at court, others only to
careers in the bureaucracy, and still others to a mix of both. Families in the second category often
migrated toward the third category and in some cases passed completely from the second category to
the first. In contrast, families in the first category, both in Paris and the provinces, remained faithful
to their history: “L’épée de haute tradition ne change pas” (Noblesses européennes, 56). Hereditary
nobles with a longstanding familial tradition of judicial service were not “épée de haute tradition” in
the sense meant by Labatut; they had not switched from a military orientation to a legal one. As a
result and despite the antiquity of their lineage, these nobles technically are not part of the group for
whose collective mentality this study is arguing.
52
On the role of birth in the definition of nobility to roughly the mid-sixteenth century, see
Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 47; Labatut, Noblesses européennes, 8, 71; Major,
Renaissance Monarchy, 334; Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, xiv-xv, 24-25, 35.
47
military service—for the blood they had spilled in the past or would spill in the
future in defense of king and country. Nobles also were entitled, by custom rather
than by law, to many other compensatory “perks” that might be granted by a grateful
monarch in exchange for their good service. Some of these were primarily honorific,
such as the granting or elevation of a title, membership in an order of knighthood, or
certain prestigious but unpaid charges in the royal household. Many of them,
however, were of concrete material benefit, such as gifts, pensions, or offices
accompanied by monetary compensation. Whether of material benefit or not, all
these perks and privileges served to distinguish the nobleman from his non-noble
brethren.
As for noble lifestyle, the theoretical ideal included land ownership,
sufficient wealth derived from that land to enable the noble owner to disdain any sort
of wage-earning labor, and the resulting leisure time to pursue appropriately “noble”
activities, many of which also permitted the visible display of said wealth and
leisure. Such display was yet another means to make manifest, in a clearly visible
manner, the difference between those who were noble and those who were not.
Nobles also enjoyed certain supposedly exclusive rights pertaining to bearing arms,
dress, hunting, coats of arms, precedence, modes of address, and so forth. Here
again, many of these rights were of no material benefit to the nobility, but they were
coveted for their prestige value as visible symbols of noble status and thus were
important components of the noble lifestyle. All these distinguishing factors
48
contributed to the recognition by the larger social collective of an individual’s noble
status, which was in itself part of what defined nobility.
53
No matter how important these distinctive indicators of noble status may
have been, however, they were in many ways secondary to certain attributes that, at
least according to the noble belief system, pointed to the nobility of character that
ultimately made a man worthy to hold that status. The two attributes considered to
be the most quintessentially indicative of this noblesse d’âme et d’esprit were
military service and the array of personal qualities which nobles called vertu and
which, they believed, could be shown to their best advantage while performing
military service.
54
Given the centrality of these two concepts to noble self-
perception and definition at this time, it is again ironic that these two qualities in
reality were the least likely ones for most nobles to possess. Although all nobles
enjoyed the same legal privileges and a large percentage of them lived at least some
elements of a noble lifestyle, only a tiny number actually served in the military and
therefore had the opportunity to display their vertu in its “proper” context:
By even the most liberal estimate, using a very inclusive definition of
military service, less than half of the … nobility could be said to have been
53
For additional information on the various elements of noble lifestyle and on both legal and
customary privileges, including the rationale behind the granting of same, see Baumgartner, France in
the Sixteenth Century, 47, 54; Jouanna, Devoir de révolte, 15, 18, 22; Jouanna, “Gros et gras,” 18, 40-
41, 43-44, 48, 86-87; Jouanna, Ordre social, 67-68, 112; Labatut, Noblesses européennes, 8, 10;
Lazard, Brantôme, 18, 20-21; Major, Renaissance Monarchy, 58, 97; Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 147-
148; Philippe Contamine, La Noblesse au royaume de France de Philippe le Bel à Louis XII: Essai de
synthèse (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1997), 332; John David Nordhaus, “Arma et
Litterae: The Education of the Noblesse de Race in Sixteenth-Century France” (Ph.D. diss., Columbia
University, 1974), 9, 19-20, 28-30.
54
“La noblesse … se distingue à la fois par les vertus qu’on lui prête et par la vocation guerrière. Les
dictionnaires anciens ou étymologiques insistent généralement sur ces deux sens du mot noblesse.”
André Corvisier, “La Noblesse militaire: Aspects militaires de la noblesse française du XV
e
au XVIII
e
siècles; état des questions,” Histoire Sociale/Social History 11 (1978), 336.
49
genuine military nobles or nobles d’épée. Less than half of the official
military class of French society, in other words, had ever performed military
service of any kind.
55
Although this quote actually pertains specifically to the patterns of military service
among the nobles of Bayeux, the general scholarly consensus makes it clear that this
assessment holds true for the sixteenth-century French nobility as a whole. Other
scholars not only concur but repeatedly stress that, at least up until the enormous
expansion of the army under Louis XIV (1643-1710), the vast majority of French
noblemen never served in the military at all and, of those who did, only a tiny
percentage could be said to have had a “career” of any significant duration or
regularity.
56
All these facts to the contrary, nobles nonetheless believed that military
service—whether actual or merely potential—was a central component of noblesse.
57
To a nobleman of this period, military service specifically meant heavy
cavalry service, which for most of the sixteenth century still retained many of its
medieval characteristics. A heavy cavalryman wore a full suit of plate armor, rode a
powerful horse that also wore plate armor, and fought primarily with lance and
55
Wood, Nobility of Bayeux, 88; see also 11-12, 72, 81-83, 90.
56
See, for example, Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 257; Jouanna, Devoir de révolte,
45-46; Jouanna, “Gros et gras,” 35; Lazard, Brantôme, 22; Major, Renaissance Monarchy, 97; Schalk,
Valor to Pedigree, 13, 35, 95-96; Arlette Jouanna, “La Noblesse française et les valeurs guerrières au
XVI
e
siècle,” in L’Homme de guerre au XVI
e
siècle, ed. Gabriel-André Pérouse, André Thierry, and
André Tournon (Saint-Etienne, France: Publications de l’Université de Saint-Etienne, 1989), 205.
57
Jouanna, “Gros et gras,” 34, sums up this aspect of the nobles’ belief system as follows: “La qualité
nobiliaire est avant tout un genre de vie hérité des ancêtres et cultivé avec soin, dans lequel la
vaillance guerrière, qu’elle soit réelle ou simplement signifiée par la possession d’armes accrochées
au-dessus de la cheminée, joue un rôle essentiel.” For additional evidence of the importance of
military service in noble self-perception and definition, from the late fifteenth century throughout the
sixteenth, see Contamine, Noblesse au royaume de France, 198; Corvisier, “Noblesse militaire,” 339,
341, 342; Jouanna, Ordre social, 61; Jouanna, “Valeurs guerrières,” 205-208; Labatut, Noblesses
européennes, 85; Major, Renaissance Monarchy, 97; Schalk, “The Military Profession As a Social
Class in the Sixteenth Century,” chap. 1 in Valor to Pedigree; Roger Mettam, Power and Faction in
Louis XIV’s France (New York: Blackwell, 1988), 73.
50
sword; when confronting enemy troops, he preferred to use a combination of
offensive shock tactics (the charge with lowered lance) and individual hand-to-hand
combat. By the beginning of the sixteenth century, this particular type of military
service already had a long history as the principle attribute and primary “function” of
the French nobility, and it continued to be viewed as such throughout the sixteenth
century.
58
The continued correlation between military service and noble status was
facilitated during this period by an increase in opportunities for French noblemen to
serve. From 1445 on, a full-time career as a heavy cavalryman in the royal
ordinance companies became an option for interested French noblemen, and from
58
How and why military service originally came to be a central attribute of nobility in France, and
how and why military service specifically came to mean armored and mounted service, fall outside
the parameters of this study. For a good overview of those developments, see Constance Brittain
Bouchard, “Strong of Body, Brave and Noble”: Chivalry and Society in Medieval France (Ithaca,
NY: Cornell University Press, 1998), especially chaps. 1 and 2, “Nobles and Knights” and “Nobles
and Society”; Gareth Prosser, “The Later Medieval French Noblesse,” in France in the Later Middle
Ages, ed. David Potter (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), also is useful for the period
immediately preceding the one covered by this study. On the correlation, both real and perceived,
between nobility and cavalry from the mid-fifteenth century throughout the sixteenth, see
Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 47, 50, 55, 153, 254; Corvisier, “Noblesse militaire,”
340, 342; Major, Renaissance Monarchy, 319; Saulx, Mémoires, 8:217; Philippe Contamine, Guerre,
état et société à la fin du Moyen Age: Etudes sur les armées des rois de France, 1337-1494 (Paris:
Mouton, 1972), 398, 416-419, 471, 472, 475, 479-480; Philippe Contamine, “Louis XI, tensions et
innovations,” in Des Origines à 1715, ed. Philippe Contamine, vol. 1 of Histoire militaire de la
France, ed. André Corvisier (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1992), 220-221 (hereafter cited
as Histoire militaire à 1715); Philippe Contamine, “Des Guerres d’Italie aux guerres de religion: Un
Nouvel Art militaire,” in Contamine, Histoire militaire à 1715, 248; Claude Gaier, “L’Opinion des
chefs de guerre français du XVI
e
siècle sur les progrès de l’art militaire,” Revue Internationale
d’Histoire Militaire 29 (1970), 730-731; J. R. Hale, War and Society in Renaissance Europe, 1450-
1620 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1985), 54, 135; Maurice Keen, Chivalry (New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1984), 152; Roger Williams, A Briefe Discourse of Warre [1590],
in The Works of Sir Roger Williams, ed. John X. Evans (Oxford: Clarendon, 1972), 28; James B.
Wood, The King’s Army: Warfare, Soldiers, and Society during the Wars of Religion in France, 1562-
1576 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 120, 122-123, 138-139. Speaking of the
gendarmes, the heavy cavalry component of the royal ordinance companies, Wood says that these
men “were regarded by all contemporaries as the most aristocratic of the army’s military
formations—considered in fact coterminous with the nobility by the king and army leaders …—and
all the available historical evidence overwhelmingly supports this conclusion” (King’s Army, 138).
51
1494 to 1559, the Hapsburg-Valois conflict offered many occasions for nobles to
fulfill their military function. This increase in opportunities for nobles to participate
in military activity from the late fifteenth century on led to a reemphasis of military
service as one of the central elements in the belief system regarding the meaning of
noblesse.
59
Even given this increase, the percentage of noblemen who served
remained quite small, and an even smaller number acquitted themselves with
sufficient panache to attract the notice of the king and the court nobility. The
valorous exploits of these glorious few nonetheless were much lauded, and the
reports of their heroic deeds also helped to reaffirm the role of military service and
martial prowess in the noble ideal.
60
As indicated in the Introduction, claiming beliefs for the entire noble
collective based solely on the beliefs and behaviors of a tiny minority is highly
problematic. As acknowledged above, the number of nobles who participated in the
Hapsburg-Valois conflict—that is, those who actually practiced the “behavior” of
military service—was small. The number who subsequently wrote of the glorious
deeds of these warriors also was small, as was—at least initially—the number of
nobles who talked and read about them. On the other hand, the Hapsburg-Valois
wars ended in 1559, and the conviction that valor in combat was one of the
quintessential and defining characteristics of nobility appears unabated in the
59
Regarding the reemphasis of the links between noble status and military service after the
establishment of the royal ordinance companies in 1445 and then again with the advent of the
Hapsburg-Valois Wars in 1494, see Contamine, Guerre, état et société, 470-472, 475-476, 479-480,
550; Contamine, Noblesse au royaume de France, 329; Jouanna, Devoir de révolte, 42-43; Jouanna,
Ordre social, 140; Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 12.
60
On the effects of such reports on the noble belief system, see Jouanna, Devoir de révolte, 43;
Jouanna, Ordre social, 145; Lazard, Brantôme, 12-13.
52
literature of the second half of the sixteenth century and, as will be seen in the next
chapter, well into the seventeenth. Just as importantly, this conviction is not limited
to the memoirs of those who participated in the Hapsburg-Valois conflict; it surfaces
in all manner of texts, even those written by non-nobles and anoblis. The spread of
these ideas beyond the literature written for and consumed by the high or court
nobles indicates that such notions had trickled down from their initial, narrow
audience into the belief system of the nobility more broadly. It thus is quite viable to
conclude that the perceived correlation between military service and noblesse was
reemphasized as a result of the real increase in noble participation in warfare and of
the reports of their actions while doing so.
As for vertu, to a traditional sixteenth-century French nobleman the meaning
of that term was far closer to the original Latin from which it was derived than to its
modern meaning of moral excellence. The Latin root of virtue is vir, or man, so the
fundamental meaning of the Latin virtus is manliness and, by extension, directly
related qualities such as courage and physical strength. As James Supple notes,
however:
In the mouth of a noble d’épée of the period, it often meant much more than
that: for him fighting was not just the main profession open to him—it was
also a way of life which embodied virtue in its most basic Latin sense, that is
that which makes a man (vir) truly excellent. Thus it was that, when the
nobles d’épée spoke of vertu, they were not just using it as a synonym for
“valour”: they were also implying that valour was “la plus excellente de
toutes les vertus.”
61
61
James Supple, Arms versus Letters: The Military and Literary Ideals in the “Essais” of Montaigne
(Oxford: Clarendon, 1984), 12; quote from Louis de Montgommery, La Milice françoise (Paris:
Rousselet, 1615), fo. aiij
v
. Obviously, vertu so defined was an ideal that applied specifically to male
members of the warrior nobility. How these ideas played into the construction of male identity more
53
The relationship between virtue, valor, and excellence noted by Supple is
fundamental to the way in which nobles understood and used the word vertu.
Excellence in this sense had far less to do with morality (at least as we understand
that term) than it did with a global superiority of character, which just happened to
shine most brilliantly on the battlefield.
62
To a sixteenth-century nobleman, vertu
thus was a multifaceted concept that consisted of personal traits that would be useful
to him at all times but especially while he was fulfilling his military function.
Given the centrality of military service to the nobility’s self-perception, it
should be no surprise that the contemporary concept of noble virtue had such heavily
martial overtones. As already noted, valor was considered to be the most important
component of vertu and included all the traits that would be of obvious use to a
warrior—attributes such as bravery, boldness, vigor, and physical strength. Valor
also included several less specifically martial traits—personal qualities that
contributed to that overall excellence evoked by Supple but that nonetheless would
generally is a topic that (again) falls outside the parameters of this study. A number of studies on the
construction of masculinity have been done for the medieval period and for early modern England,
but very little has appeared for early modern France. One recent exception is Kathleen P. Long, ed.,
High Anxiety: Masculinity in Crisis in Early Modern France (Kirksville, MO: Truman State
University Press, 2002). Unfortunately, none of the essays in this collection deals with masculinity
specifically in the context of noble identity.
62
In many respects, this interpretation of virtue echoes that of the Renaissance Italian nobility and
may even have been influenced by it; see John Plamenatz, “In Search of Machiavellian Virtù,” in The
Prince, by Niccolò Machiavelli, trans. and ed. Robert M. Adams (New York: W. W. Norton, 1977).
According to Plamenatz’s interpretation of Machiavelli, “to display virtù is not to do God’s will, nor
is it to behave morally; it is to make your will and your person count for something in the eyes of
other men and your own” (“In Search of Virtù,” 225). Jouanna, Ordre social, 22, says in reference to
the moral content of sixteenth-century French virtue in general that there was a general tendency to
confuse moral virtue with the “social” virtue that was supposed to be the privilege of superior social
groups. Social theorists of the period all concurred that the quality which deserved to be placed at the
summit of the social hierarchy was also that which was most excellent in the moral order.
54
be equally useful in war. These included sound judgment, prudence, discretion,
foresight, common sense, wisdom, knowledge, skill, experience, determination,
patience, resourcefulness, ingenuity, inventiveness, imagination, adaptability, and
speed and clarity of thought and action under pressure. Other elements of vertu that
were considered to be quintessentially noble but had even less obvious military
connotations included loyalty, honesty, courtesy, dignity, selflessness, generosity,
liberality, magnanimity, and honorable and meritorious (though not necessarily
moral) conduct.
63
Of course, all of these qualities comprising vertu, even the most blatantly
warlike among them, also could be demonstrated outside of a strictly military
context. It was, however, a common noble belief that the excellence of character that
they represented could be demonstrated best in battle. The increase in opportunities
from the latter half of the fifteenth century for French nobles to demonstrate their
vertu in its preferred context only served to reaffirm the continued relevance of their
very specific interpretation of virtue as a quality of noblesse.
Numerous sixteenth-century sources discuss the meaning of this type of vertu
and the overwhelming centrality of valor therein. Even those authors who do not
explicitly say that valor is the most important component of noble virtue include in
their definitions many qualities that indicate the centrality of military activity and
thus, by implication, of valor as well. For example, in the late sixteenth century
63
For additional lists compiled by modern scholars of various qualities comprising vertu, see Jouanna,
Ordre social, 116, 203; Jouanna, “Valeurs guerrières,” 207; Labatut, Noblesses européennes, 87-88;
Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 21.
55
Philippe Hurault de Cheverny says that “the virtues of Nobility include having the
courage to fight, generosity in one’s acts, vigor and strength in their execution, the
clemency and goodness to forgive….”
64
Although Hurault does not stipulate that
these virtues can or should be used in battle, any of them would be useful in that
context, and several of them—having “bon cœur pour résister” or “vigueur et force”
in one’s actions—have distinctly martial undertones.
65
In his 1578 treatise on nobility, Pierre d’Origny states that “virtue … is not
one but several things” and that it includes “justice …, magnanimity, liberality,
forcefulness, temperance, patience, and others.” There is no apparent reference to
valor or combat here, but in the very next sentence, Origny says that “defense of the
afflicted, and … of their country, and of the authority of their Prince: this is what
makes men Noble and renders them admirable.”
66
Even though Origny does not
specifically include valor in his definition of vertu, anyone performing the activity
“qui fait les Nobles” certainly would need it.
64
“Ce sont vertus de Noblesse, avoir bon cœur pour resister, generosité aux actions, vigueur et force
en l’execution, clemence, et bonté pour pardonner….” Philippe Hurault de Cheverny, Instructions à
son fils [ca. 1589-1599], 2 vols. (The Hague: J. et D. Steucker, 1669), 2:312, cited by Jouanna, Ordre
social, 42-43.
65
Origny also offers a list of qualities comprising noble vertu in which valor in combat is more
implied than explicit. He proposes the great fourteenth-century knight, Bertrand du Guesclin, as
exemplifying all the best noble virtues in both war and peace: “une admirable constance en ses
adversitez, et un cueur du tout indomtable par inconvénient; en la guerre une magnanimité et force
insupérable; en la paix, traictable et libéral plus que ses moyens ne le pouvoient porter….” Origny,
Hérault de la noblesse, 17.
66
“[L]a vertu … est non d’un, mais de plusieurs effectz…. [N]ous disons justice estre vertu,
magnanimité, libéralité, force, tempérance, patience, et les autres…. [L]a deffence des affligez, et …
de son pays, et de l’authorité de son Prince: c’est ce qui fait les Nobles et les rend admirables.”
Origny, Hérault de la noblesse, 19. It is not impossible that Origny did not specify valor as part of
vertu, either in this passage or the one in the previous note, because, by the time he was writing, its
inclusion was such a given that it literally went without saying.
56
Other authors are far more explicit about the central role of valor within the
larger context of noble vertu. Writing in the 1580s, Michel de Montaigne says quite
bluntly that “the greatest, most generous and most superb of all the virtues is
valor.”
67
Elsewhere, he elaborates on the relationship between valor, virtue, and
excellence of character more generally:
Our nation places valor first among the virtues, as shown by its name, which
comes from valeur [worth or merit]; and in our common usage, when we say
a man of great worth or a man of great virtue, in the style of our court and our
nobility, we mean nothing other than a valiant man….
68
In an anonymous treatise written in 1567, the noble author also draws a direct
connection between vertu and valor in combat:
To fight to maintain the honor of God and a peaceful kingdom, to spread
more widely the King’s authority against his enemies, and on such occasions
not to be afraid of cold nor heat, but to offer one’s life courageously, those
are the proper qualities of virtue.
69
Among the many scholars who have noted or remarked on the heavily martial
content of sixteenth-century noble vertu,
70
Arlette Jouanna in particular stands out
for the amount of reading she has done across a wide range of literary sources
written by or about nobles and nobility. She sums up the meaning of this term as
follows:
67
“La plus forte, genereuse et superbe de toutes les vertus est la vaillance….” Michel de Montaigne,
Les Essais [1588], ed. Pierre Villey, 3 vols. (Paris: F. Alcan, 1930-1941), 2:105, cited by Jouanna,
“Idée de race,” 323.
68
“Nostre nation donne à la vaillance le premier degré des vertus, comme son nom montre, qui vient
de valeur; et … à notre usage, quand nous disons un homme qui vaut beaucoup, ou un homme de
bien, au stile de nostre court et de nostre noblesse, ce n’est à dire autre chose qu’un vaillant
homme….” Montaigne, Essais [1580-1595], in Œuvres complètes, ed. A. Thibaudet and M. Rat
(Paris: Gallimard, 1962), ii.7.363, cited by Supple, Arms versus Letters, 12.
69
Lettre missive d’un gentilhomme (n.p., 1567), 3, cited and translated by Schalk, Valor to Pedigree,
30.
70
For example, Devyver, Labatut, Lazard, Mettam, Schalk, and Supple.
57
Regarding the content of the word “virtue” …, for many [nobles] it still
meant “martial virtue,” that warlike courage, that strength of character that
allowed one to face danger without trembling and to look death in the face.
To be “stout of heart,” to control one’s emotions, to know how to sleep on the
ground and withstand hunger and cold, to have strong nerves and muscles,
but also [to have] the sharp eye and quick mind to seize an opportunity, to
feel a burning desire to conquer and to gain a reputation, such were the most
admired human qualities.
71
Vertu thus encompassed far more than mere valor, at least as we understand that term
today. Jouanna concurs that valor was, to a traditional sixteenth-century French
nobleman, “perceived as a total virtue, containing and transcending all others”; it
was “considered the summit of human excellence, a complete virtue that put into
play all the abilities of mind and body.”
72
Since the summit of human excellence supposedly was occupied by those of
noble status, the lines separating the concepts of valor, vertu, and nobility itself
became almost hopelessly blurred. To a French nobleman of this period, his identity
as a man of vertu was inextricably intertwined with his identity as a warrior, both of
which in turn were inextricably intertwined with his identity as a nobleman. As a
result of this mélange of ideas, most traditional French nobles believed that noblesse
was defined primarily by a combination of military service and that peculiarly
martial form of virtue that represented a superiority of mind and body which—
71
“Sur le contenu du mot ‘vertu’ …, pour beaucoup, c’était encore la ‘vertu bellique,’ le courage
guerrier, la force de caractère qui permettait d’affronter les périls sans trembler et de regarder la mort
en face. Avoir ‘du cœur au ventre,’ dominer ses émotions, savoir coucher sur la dure et supporter la
faim et le froid, avoir des nerfs et des muscles solides, mais aussi l’œil vif et l’esprit prompt pour
saisir les occasions, ressentir l’ardente envie de vaincre et d’acquérir de la réputation, telles étaient les
qualités humaines les plus admirées.” Jouanna, Devoir de révolte, 41.
72
Jouanna, “Valeurs guerrières,” 207, and “Gros et gras,” 33, respectively.
58
although it found its fullest expression on the battlefield—transcended mere valor in
combat.
In his 1596 treatise on nobility, David Rivault de Flurance lists the traits that
in his view comprise this particular conception of human excellence:
Wise and learned in council, restrained when necessary, patient in times of
scarcity, fair when using force, swift, shrewd, and daring in its execution,
quick to pursue his point or the opportunity that presents itself: in short, he
who scorns his comfort and his life when it is a question of honor is the
perfect warrior, and he cannot be such without possessing all virtues entirely
and perfectly.
73
One of the most interesting aspects of this passage is that Rivault does not say that he
who possesses all these superlative qualities is the perfect nobleman, but rather the
perfect warrior. Given that many of the traits on his list do not have an obvious or
direct connection to warfare, this is a particularly striking choice, and one that
underlines the power and pervasiveness of the martial nature of noble self-perception
and definition.
Numerous contemporaries offer similar descriptions and definitions of
nobility and the qualities it comprised.
74
Throughout the sixteenth century, the belief
73
“Le sage et sçavant au conseil, sobre en nécessité, patient en disette, juste parmy la force, prompt,
caut et hardy en l’execution, diligent à poursuivre sa pointe ou la fortune qui se presente: bref, le
mespriseur de son aise et de sa vie, quand il y va de l’honneur, est le parfait guerrier, qui ne peut estre
tel, sans avoir en soy toutes vertus accomplies.” David Rivault de Flurance, Les Etats, esquels il est
discouru du prince, du noble, et du tiers état, conformément à nostre temps (Lyon: B. Rigaud, 1596),
312-313, cited by Jouanna, “Idée de race,” 385. In early modern French usage, the term “diligent” is
more likely to mean “speedy” or “prompt” than it is to mean an action characterized by steady, earnest
application or effort; see DAF, s.v. “diligent”; cf. Larousse Standard French-English/English-French
Dictionary, 1994 ed., s.v. “diligent,” which indicates that, in modern French usage, the second
meaning is the more common one.
74
See, for example, François de l’Alouëte, Traité des nobles et des vertus dont ils sont formés (Paris:
R. Le Manier, 1577), fols. 20
v
, 1
r-v
, cited by Jouanna, “Idée de race,” 163, 251-252, respectively; F. de
la Noue, Discours politiques et militaires, 231-232; Saulx, Mémoires, 8:57, 8:61. The qualities that
these authors associate with nobility include virtue, valor, courage, strength, vigor, boldness, wisdom,
59
that noble status was a product of vertu was stated with particular frequency and
insistence. Pierre de la Vacherie (ca. 1510) says that “a man is not ennobled by
riches but by the virtues that are in him.” Symphorien Champier (1535) states that
“nobility comes from virtue.” Eymar de Froydeville (1574) maintains that “there is
no true nobility other than that which originates in virtue.” Pierre d’Origny (1578)
asserts that “to be truly noble is to follow virtue” and that “nobility without a doubt
proceeds from virtuous action, is acquired by that means, [and] is maintained by it.”
Pierre de Saint-Julien de Balleure says that “nobility is the daughter of virtue” (1581)
and that “virtue … was the beginning of true nobility” (1588).
75
Most authors also emphasize the importance of military service as a central
quality of noblesse. The oft-cited quote by Montaigne is particularly explicit: “The
proper, sole, and essential vocation of the nobility in France is military service.”
76
Many others, however, combine the two, thereby underscoring the belief that the
optimal showcase for the virtue that defined noblesse was somewhere on—or at least
good sense, prudence, foresight, judgment, resolve, skill, knowledge, patience, resourcefulness,
generosity, liberality, magnanimity, loyalty, and honor.
75
Pierre de la Vacherie, “Le Gouvernement des trois estatz du temps qui court,” in Recueil de poésies
françaises des XV
e
et XVI
e
siècles: Morales, facétieuses, historiques, ed. Anatole de Montaiglon and
James de Rothschild, vol. 12 (Paris: P. Jannet, 1877), 81-82, cited and translated by Schalk, Valor to
Pedigree, 29. Symphorien Champier, Le Fondement et origine des tiltres de noblesse (Paris: Janot,
1535), 3 (also 14, “de vertu vient noblesse”), cited by Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 27-28. Eymar de
Froydeville, Dialogues de l’origine de la noblesse où est déclaré que c’est d’icelle et ses inventeurs
(Lyon: Barthelemi Honorati, 1574), 39, cited by Schalk, “Appearance and Reality,” 20 n. 3. Origny,
Hérault de la noblesse, 19, 37, respectively. Pierre de Saint-Julien de Balleure, De l’Origine des
Bourgongnons (Paris: N. Chesneau, 1581), 127, cited by Jouanna, “Idée de race,” 318. Pierre de
Saint-Julien de Balleure, “De Noblesse: et quelle vertu en est mere,” in Meslanges historiques, et
recueils de diverses matières pour la pluspart paradoxalles, et neanmoins vrayes (Lyon: B. Rigaud,
1588), 602, cited by Jouanna, “Idée de race,” 335.
76
“La forme propre, et seule, et essencielle de noblesse en France, c’est la vacation militaire.”
Montaigne, Essais, in Œuvres complètes, ed. Thibaudet and Rat, ii.7.363, cited by Supple, Arms
versus Letters, 186. Elsewhere, Montaigne again underlines the links between nobility and military
service: “Il n’est occupation plaisante comme la militaire; occupation et noble en execution … et
noble en sa cause….” Montaigne, Essais, ed. Villey, 3:627, cited by Jouanna, “Idée de race,” 323.
60
related to—a battlefield. Pierre d’Origny stipulates that to acquire nobility one not
only must follow virtue but must do so while subjecting oneself to the risks and
dangers of combat.
77
François de l’Alouëte also links virtue and military service—
which he, like Montaigne, calls the “vocation” of nobles—in his description of what
makes a noble:
Since virtue is never idle but is always ready to produce the effects and fruits
of its labor in those who employ it, every time that it is practiced and put
forward for its proper cause, in the vocation and profession of Nobles, and
that it encounters the point at which Nobility can and merits to be conceived
and formed, it will not fail to make and produce a Noble man, whom the
Prince will avow and declare as such, and everyone will recognize him as
Noble.
78
According to l’Alouëte, it is not enough simply to be virtuous or to perform military
service. To be recognized as truly and legitimately noble, one must practice virtue
while performing military service. Here again, that is because this peculiarly martial
form of vertu represented far more than mere valor in combat in the minds of
sixteenth-century French noblemen. Given the pervasiveness of these ideas across a
substantial period and in a wide variety of literary texts, there can be little doubt that
military service and vertu were considered by the majority of traditional nobles to be
77
Speaking of noblesse, he says that, “pour laquelle acquérir en suivant la vertu, [il] faut … se
submettre aux dangers et hazardz périlleux des entreprises belliqueuses….” Origny, Hérault de la
noblesse, 18.
78
“Il s’ensuit aussi, que comme la vertu n’est jamais oisive, ains est toujours preste de produire les
effects et fruicts de son travail en ceus qui l’emploient, toutes les fois qu’elle sera exercée en son
sujet, mise en avant en la vocation et profession des Nobles, et qu’elle aura rencontré le point auquel
Noblesse peut et mérite d’estre conceuë et formée, elle ne faudra point de faire et produire un homme
Noble, que le Prince avouëra et déclarera pour tel, et tous le recevront au rang des Nobles.”
L’Alouëte, Traité des nobles, fols. 23
r-v
, cited by Arlette Jouanna, “Perception et appréciation de
l’anoblissement dans la France du XVI
e
siècle et du début du XVII
e
siècle,” in Anoblissement en
France, 8. On the synonymy of military service and “la profession de noblesse,” see Schalk, Valor to
Pedigree, 5-7.
61
central components of their understanding of the meaning of noblesse and that the
two concepts were intimately related to one another. As already shown, however,
vertu was not limited to valor, and valor was not limited to qualities that would be
useful only when engaged in battle. By the same token, military service was not
limited to the act of combat; it was the ideal showcase for virtue in all its guises.
Warfare allowed a nobleman to employ and display not only his courage, daring, and
physical strength but also all the other traits comprising the type of vertu possessed
by a man of true nobility: his sound judgment, common sense, prudence, discretion,
foresight, wisdom, skill, knowledge, experience, imagination, ingenuity,
resourcefulness, inventiveness, determination, patience, adaptability, and speed and
clarity of thought and action when under pressure, as well as his loyalty, honesty,
courtesy, dignity, selflessness, generosity, liberality, magnanimity, honor, and
merit.
79
As the following chapters will demonstrate, manège horsemanship in general
and the airs above the ground in particular shared with warfare this capacity to
showcase multiple aspects of a nobleman’s vertu. That capacity, coupled with the
ability of these mounted activities to allow nobles simultaneously to display more
recently added qualities of noblesse such as grace and sprezzatura, helped the
79
Jouanna, “Valeurs guerrières,” 207, sums this up well: “L’épée demeure donc pour beaucoup le
signe de la noblesse. Mais, ce qu’elle signale, c’est une qualité intérieure, une excellence humaine; la
supériorité qu’elle indique est de l’ordre de l’être et non pas du faire. Autrement dit, la guerre n’est
pas à proprement parler une fonction du noble, mais l’élément essentiel d’un art de vivre et de
mourir….”
62
traditional early modern French nobility to respond to challenges to its existing self-
perception and definition.
Challenges to the Definition
Going into the sixteenth century, the technological, tactical, and economic
changes that eventually would render the medieval heavy cavalryman obsolete still
were in their nascent stages. For much of the first half of the sixteenth century,
France’s military circumstances were such that the nobles still were able to justify
and define their order largely on the basis of military service and vertu and therefore
were able to continue to claim with at least some legitimacy that their status and
privileges were a sort of compensation for their function as defenders of the realm.
Because of the intimate and entangled relationship between military service and
virtue, this also allowed them to continue to believe that being noble revolved around
a certain type of military service (heavy cavalry) and a certain set of personal
characteristics (martial vertu), which coincidentally just happened to manifest
themselves most gloriously in the pursuit of that particular type of military service.
Unfortunately for the nobles’ belief system, in the larger mix of elements that
traditionally had defined nobility, the central importance of both heavy cavalry
service and its handmaiden, martial vertu, was undermined in various ways over the
course of the sixteenth century. By the beginning of that century, the military
importance of the traditional heavy cavalry already had been declining slowly but
steadily for nearly two centuries. Some of the factors that contributed to this slow
decline had begun to manifest themselves as far back as the early fourteenth century,
63
when the use of massed infantry formations first began to challenge the efficacy of
heavy cavalry. There were, however, several key factors that did not have a major
impact until the first half of the sixteenth century. Taken in combination, and more
or less coinciding as they did, these factors finally brought about the demise of the
heavy cavalryman.
80
First, gun-bearing infantry was being deployed more effectively against
cavalry. By the 1520s, natural or manmade barriers and trenches were being
employed on a routine basis in order to protect gunners from cavalry assault while
they were reloading.
81
By the 1540s, gunners and pikemen were being deployed in
coordinated formations that made both types of infantry more effective against and
80
The decline of the fully armored cavalryman fighting with lance and sword from the back of a fully
armored warhorse is part of what has come to be known as the Military Revolution. This concept was
introduced by Michael Roberts in The Military Revolution, 1560-1660 (Belfast: M. Boyd, 1956).
Roberts’s thesis remained essentially unchallenged until the publication of Geoffrey Parker’s “The
Military Revolution, 1560-1660—A Myth?” Journal of Modern History 48 (1976): 195-214. Since
1976, various scholars have revisited and reevaluated the theses of both Roberts and Parker,
questioning when the “revolution” actually happened and of what precisely it consisted; no one,
however, questions that heavy cavalry, at least as that term was employed in the first half of the
sixteenth century, was one of its casualties. Some of the best sources on the Military Revolution
include Brian M. Downing, The Military Revolution and Political Change: Origins of Democracy and
Autocracy in Early Modern Europe (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992), especially
chap. 3, “The Military Revolution”; David Eltis, The Military Revolution in Sixteenth-century Europe
(London: Tauris, 1995), especially chap. 2, “The Military Revolution and the Historians”; Geoffrey
Parker, The Military Revolution: Military Innovation and the Rise of the West, 1500-1800, 2
nd
ed.
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996); Clifford J. Rogers, ed., The Military Revolution
Debate: Readings on the Military Transformation of Early Modern Europe (Boulder, CO: Westview,
1995). This last collection of essays includes a reprint of Roberts’s text as it appeared in his Essays in
Swedish History (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1967), a reprint of the revised version
of Parker’s article as it appeared in his Spain and the Netherlands 1559-1659: Ten Studies (London:
Collins, 1979), and a new essay by Parker, “In Defense of The Military Revolution,” in which he
defends his thesis against those who attacked it in the twenty years since its first publication. All
references to Parker’s “Military Revolution—A Myth?” are to the essay as it is reprinted in Military
Revolution Debate.
81
Eltis, Military Revolution, 23, 46-47, 50; Gaier, “Opinion des chefs de guerre,” 743; F. de la Noue,
Discours politiques et militaires, 363, 370, 375; Charles Oman, A History of the Art of War in the
Sixteenth Century (New York: Dutton, 1937; reprint, New York: AMS, 1979; page references are to
1979 ed., 33, 44, 224; Treva J. Tucker, “Eminence over Efficacy: Social Status and Cavalry Service in
Sixteenth-Century France,” Sixteenth Century Journal 23 (2001), 1063, 1065.
64
less vulnerable to mounted attack.
82
Second, from the 1520s on, a new type of
fortification began to shift the emphasis in strategy from battle to siege. To capture
or defend a fortified emplacement required vast numbers of infantry armed with
guns, not a small force of heavy cavalry armed with lance and sword.
83
Third, the
development of the pistol in the early sixteenth century led to the appearance, from
the 1540s on, of a new form of combat cavalry, the mounted pistoleer. These
horsemen were less comprehensively armored than traditional cavalry, so their
mounts did not need to be so heavy and were able to move more quickly. As
gunpowder weapons became both more prevalent and more effective, the speed and
maneuverability of this lighter type of cavalry made it less vulnerable to gunfire.
84
Finally, there was the ongoing issue of costs. Infantry was far less expensive than
cavalry of any kind. It cost less to equip, supply, and maintain, and its members
could be paid a lower wage, all because there were no horses involved. Infantry also
82
Eltis, Military Revolution, 23, 44, 49-51; Gaier, “Opinion des chefs de guerre,” 743; Oman, War in
the Sixteenth Century, 35; Tucker, “Eminence over Efficacy,” 1065; Bert S. Hall, Weapons and
Warfare in Renaissance Europe: Gunpowder, Technology, and Tactics (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1997), 186-187; Archer Jones, The Art of War in the Western World (Chicago:
University of Illinois Press, 1987), 191.
83
On the development of artillery-resistant fortresses and their effect on military strategy in general
and on heavy cavalry in particular, see Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 156; Hall,
Weapons and Warfare, 164-165, 210-211; Parker, “Defense of The Military Revolution,” 337-338,
345-350; Parker, “Military Revolution—A Myth?” 41-42; David Potter, War and Government in the
French Provinces: Picardy 1470-1560 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 157. Eltis,
Military Revolution, 29-30, makes the excellent additional point that siege warfare increased during
this period not only in response to the development of new types of fortifications but also because any
fortress—new or old—could be defended more effectively because of improvements in artillery. This
helps to explain why sieges overshadowed battles even in those areas where the new fortresses were
uncommon or even entirely absent, a circumstance that admittedly held true for certain parts of
France.
84
On the rise of the mounted pistoleer and his arms, armor, mount, and mobility, see Tucker,
“Eminence over Efficacy,” 1061-1062, 1068-1069, and sources cited there, especially in nn. 11, 12,
39, and 40.
65
was faster—and therefore cheaper—to train because there was no riding involved.
85
If cavalry was needed, mounted pistoleers were a better bargain than traditional
heavy cavalry. They required less armor, and their lighter horses were less costly to
purchase, easier to obtain, and cheaper to feed.
By the middle of the sixteenth century, the nobility’s customary military role
was in a state of irreversible decline. The efficacy of the armored heavy cavalryman
on his armored warhorse had been undermined by changing strategic demands and
by new and more effective technologies, tactics, and troop types, both mounted and
foot, and the ever-rising costs associated with heavy cavalry had made both infantry
and lighter forms of cavalry far more appealing to military leaders. During the
French civil-religious conflict of the second half of the sixteenth century, all these
trends continued apace. When that conflict ended in 1598, only a very limited
number of infantry and a tiny contingent of cavalry were retained by the Crown on a
permanent, paid basis.
86
By the beginning of the seventeenth century, a full-time
career as a heavy cavalryman had become an impossibility for most French
noblemen.
87
Since heavy cavalry was the type of military service that nobles
85
Parker, “Defense of The Military Revolution,” 351; Parker, “Military Revolution—A Myth?” 44;
Wood, King’s Army, 135-136; Frank Tallett, War and Society in Early-Modern Europe, 1495-1715
(New York: Routledge, 1992), 29-30.
86
Parrott, “Richelieu, the Grands, and the French Army,” 143.
87
Opportunities for nobles to serve in the military once again became substantial in the later
seventeenth century. There was a modest increase after the Franco-Spanish phase of the Thirty Years
War began in 1635, but opportunities really expanded during the personal reign of the bellicose Louis
XIV (1643-1715, personal reign from 1661). Although it thus is true that the decline in the nobility’s
military function was largely temporary (ca. 1570s to 1630s), nobles who lived during that period of
hiatus had no way of knowing that was the case. Perhaps just as importantly, even though cavalry
once again became an important component in warfare in the seventeenth century, the type of
performance in battle a nobleman could expect to experience no longer allowed for the individual
demonstration of personal vertu. Changes in technology and tactics had precluded such behavior, or
66
considered most appropriate to their status, this sharp decline in opportunities for
nobles to fulfill their traditional military role made it difficult for them to continue to
claim either that military service was one of the central elements defining nobility or
that such service was the legitimate basis for their status and privileges.
Because so many of the qualities comprising noble vertu were so intimately
connected to military service, the decline in opportunities for nobles to fulfill their
military function also undermined the validity of virtue—at least as it was defined by
the traditional nobility—as a required characteristic of noblesse. To further
compound matters, over the course of the sixteenth century, noble vertu came under
attack from various directions having little or nothing to do with the military changes
detailed above.
The biggest challenge to vertu as one of the two most important elements
defining nobility was a byproduct of the emergence over the course of the sixteenth
century of a new category of nobility, based not on military service and martial
virtue but on service in royal office. The emergence of this “second” nobility did not
undermine virtue itself as a quality of nobility, but it did undermine the way in which
the traditional nobility defined it. Those who had achieved noble status through
office had been elevated into the nobility in recognition of virtues of an entirely
different nature from the predominately military vertu promulgated by the traditional
nobles. The fact that it had become possible to achieve nobility without ever setting
foot on a battlefield (or being descended from someone who had) thus undermined
at least had marginalized it to the point that those who persisted in indulging in it were criticized
rather than lauded.
67
the existing definition of virtue, with its heavy emphasis on valor, by demonstrating
that virtue no longer needed to be martial in order to qualify as a legitimate quality of
nobility. The appearance of this “alternative” nobility suggested that there could be
a second, equally valid model for noblesse that did not involve valor at all and that
was based instead on the virtues of acquired knowledge and of demonstrated
competence and ability in arenas other than the battlefield.
88
This expansion of the meaning of virtue to include activities, abilities, and
qualities beyond the military sphere supported the arguments of royal officials who
claimed that their civil service was just as noble as the (supposed) military service of
the traditional nobles, if not in fact superior to it. Newly ennobled royal
officeholders pointed out that they not only served a viable social function, they also
served that function on an ongoing basis. Most of the traditional nobles, on the other
hand, fulfilled their supposed military function only intermittently, if at all, and the
rest of the time they made no useful contribution to society whatsoever. This being
so, the new nobles argued, the civil virtues of royal officials were just as valid and
worthy, and therefore just as deserving of recognition as noble, as the martial virtues
88
Chartier, “Etats généraux de 1614,” 121-122; Devyver, Sang épuré, 76-77; Dewald, Aristocratic
Experience, 22; Jouanna, Devoir de révolte, 42; Jouanna, “Gentilshommes français,” 34; Jouanna,
“Gros et gras,” 36-37; Jouanna, Ordre social, 22, 139, 180; Jouanna, “Valeurs guerrières,” 214;
Supple, Arms versus Letters, 77-78; Arlette Jouanna, “Recherches sur la notion d’honneur au XVI
e
siècle,” Revue d’Histoire Moderne et Contemporaine 15 (1968), 605; Roger Mettam, “The French
Nobility, 1610-1715,” in Western Europe, vol. 1 of The European Nobilities in the Seventeenth and
Eighteenth Centuries, ed. H. M. Scott (New York: Longman, 1995), 115, 118; Eugene F. Rice, Jr.,
“Humanism in France,” in Humanism Beyond Italy, vol. 2 of Renaissance Humanism: Foundations,
Forms, and Legacy, ed. Albert Rabil, Jr. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1988), 119-
120.
68
of the traditional nobles.
89
The new nobles also maintained that a man personally
had to demonstrate his virtue (whatever its nature) during his lifetime in order for
that virtue to be considered a legitimate quality of nobility. According to this line of
thinking, the vertu of a nobleman whose only relationship to his military function
was through the past service of a distant ancestor or through the potential service of
an unknown descendant was invalid.
90
Despite these arguments, the traditional nobles continued to insist that the
only truly noble form of virtue was the one that revolved around qualities that could
be demonstrated best on the battlefield. Since their opportunities to participate in the
type of conflict necessary to showcase those qualities were becoming increasingly
limited, their opportunities to demonstrate their personal virtue, and thus to validate
that particular type of virtue as a necessary characteristic of nobility, were extremely
limited as well. The arguments of the new nobles regarding both the nature of virtue
as a quality of nobility and the manner in which that virtue was to be demonstrated,
coupled with the continuing decline in the nobles’ ability to fulfill their traditional
military function, undermined the existing emphasis on both of those elements
within the larger mix that defined nobility.
Finally, the heavily martial nature of existing notions about noble identity
was undermined yet further by the addition of several new and entirely non-martial
89
Corvisier, “Noblesse militaire,” 344; Devyver, Sang épuré, 77; Jouanna, Devoir de révolte, 42;
Jouanna, “Gros et gras,” 36-37, 114; Jouanna, “Notion d’honneur,” 606; Jouanna, Ordre social, 61,
149, 204; Jouanna, “Perception et appréciation,” 16; Jouanna, “Valeurs guerrières,” 214; Lazard,
Brantôme, 17; Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 57.
90
Devyver, Sang épuré, 228-229; Lazard, Brantôme, 17; Rice, “Humanism in France,” 120; Schalk,
Valor to Pedigree, 106, 117-118.
69
attributes to the noble construct during the sixteenth century. One of the many
factors contributing to the gradual shift in noble beliefs about the meaning of
noblesse was the influence of Renaissance Italy at the sixteenth-century French
court. François I (1515-1547) was the first of several French kings to make a serious
effort to model his court after the more refined and luxurious example of the Italian
courts of the period. His efforts received a substantial boost when his son, the future
Henri II (1547-1559), married Catherine de Médicis in 1533. The tenure of an
Italian consort—first as dauphine, then as queen, and ultimately as queen mother
during the reigns of François II, Charles IX, and Henri III until her death in 1589—
encouraged a further increase in both the presence of Italians and the general
influence of their culture at the French court. From the 1530s on, the rough manners
and crude behavior of the French courtiers gradually began to grow more civilized as
the norms of the court slowly began to incorporate some of the new Italian ideas.
91
One current of Renaissance Italian thought that had a particular influence on
the way in which the traditional French nobility defined noblesse was the concept of
91
On the importance of the Italian influence at the French court and on the timing and nature of its
impact, see Duindam, Myths of Power, 161; Jouanna, Ordre social, 167; Lazard, Brantôme, 19;
Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 123, 139; Muchembled, Invention de l’homme moderne, 37,
89, 138, 139; Peter Burke, “The Courtier,” in Renaissance Characters, ed. Eugenio Garin, trans.
Lydia G. Cochrane (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991), 120; Aldo Scaglione, Knights at
Court: Courtliness, Chivalry, and Courtesy from Ottonian Germany to the Italian Renaissance
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991), 294; Ellery Schalk, “The Court as ‘Civilizer’ of
Nobility: Noble Attitudes and the Court in France in the Late Sixteenth and Early Seventeenth
Centuries,” in Princes, Patronage and the Nobility: The Court at the Beginning of the Modern Age,
ca. 1450-1650, ed. Ronald G. Asch and Adolf M. Birke (Oxford: Oxford University Press for the
German Historical Institute London, 1991), 249-250; Michael Wintroub, “Words, Deeds, and a
Womanly King,” French Historical Studies 28 (2005), 401 n. 72. On the general increase in
refinement at the French court and among French courtiers during this period, see Muchembled,
Invention de l’homme moderne, 82; Schalk, “Court as ‘Civilizer’ of Nobility,” 248, 251; Wintroub,
“Words, Deeds, and a Womanly King,” 396.
70
the ideal courtier. This ideal was promulgated first and most successfully in 1528 by
the Italian nobleman Baldessare Castiglione in Il Cortegiano, or The Book of the
Courtier.
92
François I had the book translated into French in 1537, and from that
point forward the ideal outlined by Castiglione gradually began to have what
ultimately would be a profound effect on the belief system of the French nobles.
While it would be ludicrous to suggest that a single text was responsible for
changing the thinking and behavior of the entire nobility, many scholars have
researched and remarked on the exceptional impact of this book. According to Jorge
Arditi, the reputation of The Book of the Courtier already had attained such heights
by the time it was translated in 1537 that “it was soon to be the golden book of
French nobility, among whom ‘knowing the Cortegiano’ was to become
proverbial.”
93
Even though Arditi is referring here solely to the court nobles, this
statement still seems a bit hyperbolic. It nonetheless remains true that, throughout
the reigns of the remaining Valois kings, those who aspired to succeed at court
92
The material that follows was drawn from a modern English translation of Il Cortegiano:
Baldessare Castiglione, The Book of the Courtier, trans. Leonard Eckstein Opdycke, rev. ed. (New
York: Horace Liveright, 1929). Other influential examples of early modern courtly literature include
Eustache du Refuge, Traité de la cour, ou Instruction des courtisans, 1616; Nicolas Faret, L’Honneste
Homme, ou L’Art de plaire à la court, 1630; Baltasar Gracián, Oráculo manual y arte de prudencia,
1647. This genre, targeted at that tiny and almost exclusively noble minority who hoped to make a
career at court, differs from manuals of civility, manners, and etiquette, which were intended for a
wide range of readers. Notable examples of this genre include Desiderius Erasmus, De civilitate
morum puerilium, 1530; Giovanni della Casa, Il Galateo, 1558; Stefano Guazzo, La Civil
Conversazione, 1574.
93
Jorge Arditi, A Genealogy of Manners: Transformations of Social Relations in France and England
from the Fourteenth to the Eighteenth Century (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998), 102.
71
increasingly were obligated to conduct themselves “à l’italienne” and to incorporate
at least some aspects of Castiglione’s ideal into their attitudes and comportment.
94
As already discussed, however, the fact that the beliefs and behaviors of a
small and atypical subset of the nobility underwent a change over the course of the
second half of the sixteenth century in no way guarantees that the beliefs and
behaviors of the rest of the nobility automatically followed suit. Indeed, the impact
of Italian culture and of Castiglione’s ideal on general levels of refinement and
manners outside the rarefied atmosphere of the court initially was virtually
nonexistent. Most French nobles continued to behave in their customary rough
fashion, and even some of those within court circles were reluctant to acquiesce to
the new demands.
95
Over time, however, the changes taking place in the attitudes and
comportment of the court nobility did begin to spread to the noble order as a whole.
As noted in the methodological arguments laid out in the Introduction, changes in the
beliefs and behaviors of those at the pinnacle of the noble pyramid tended gradually
to trickle down and influence the beliefs (if not necessarily the behaviors) of those
closer to its base. One means of tracing this phenomenon is through long-term
94
On the impact specifically of The Book of the Courtier on the increasingly civilized behavior of the
French courtiers, see Duindam, Myths of Power, 160-161; Jouanna, Ordre social, 66; Lazard,
Brantôme, 19; Muchembled, Société, cultures et mentalités, 155; Schalk, “Court as ‘Civilizer’ of
Nobility,” 249, 251; Wintroub, “Words, Deeds, and a Womanly King,” 390; Laurence Brockliss,
“Richelieu, Education, and the State,” in Richelieu and His Age, 241.
95
On the gradual nature of increases in refinement, both among the court nobility and especially
among the nobility more broadly, see Jouanna, “Gros et gras,” 137; Muchembled, Invention de
l’homme moderne, 37, 82, 89, 138, 391; Maurice Magendie, ed., introduction to L’Honneste Homme,
ou L’Art de plaire à la court [1630], by Nicolas Faret, rev. ed. (Paris: Toussainct Quinet, 1636;
reprint, Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1925; page references are to 1925 ed.), xv.
72
changes in the literary evidence. In the case of eventual changes in the belief system
of the traditional French nobility, this can be seen first in texts that emphasize, with
ever increasing frequency and insistence, the importance of gracefulness in all a
courtier’s actions as well as the nonchalant and spontaneous character which that
grace should have. By the time the first edition of the earliest manual of
horsemanship used for this study appeared at the very end of the sixteenth century, it
is evident from the book’s language that these ideas are no longer new. Given that
the audience at whom the manuals were targeted was primarily noblemen attached to
the court, however, this does not yet tell us much about changes in the beliefs of the
nobility as a whole. By the time the last manual appeared around seven decades
later, on the other hand, the different types and number of texts espousing grace and
sprezzatura as crucial aspects of noblesse had grown to the extent that it can be
assumed that these ideas no longer were restricted to the court nobility but had
spread to a substantial percentage of the nobility as a whole.
The Book of the Courtier was by no means the only factor involved in this
cascade of changes in beliefs and behaviors, nor was the ideal it describes transferred
to the French context without modification. Its importance to the gradual shift in
noble beliefs about the meaning of noblesse nonetheless is difficult to deny. Peter
Burke’s research on the early modern European reception of and responses to
Castiglione’s book is particularly useful in this context. Burke begins by
acknowledging the difficulties and risks inherent in trying to trace the impact of any
given text or set of ideas, pointing out that “changes often occur in the course of
73
transmitting concepts, practices and values. Traditions are constantly transformed,
reinterpreted or reconstructed—whether this reconstruction is conscious or
unconscious—to fit their new spatial or temporal environments.” Both individuals
and social groups select from the culture around them what seems relevant or useful
to them; they then incorporate that new information into what they already possess.
In the case of a text such as The Book of the Courtier, readers rarely if ever were
simply passive recipients of the ideas it contained. Instead, they adopted only those
elements that met their needs, modifying them as necessary to fit their new cultural
context.
96
Keeping these concepts drawn from reception theory in mind, Burke employs
a range of methods to assess the diffusion, reception, and readership of Castiglione’s
book. He looks at the numerous editions and translations, he analyzes marginalia to
gauge the responses of individual readers, and he examines various kinds of records
in an attempt to ascertain the types of people who owned and therefore were most
likely to have read the book.
97
His research substantiates the enormous popularity of
this text in sixteenth-century France, particularly among the nobility. Between 1537
and 1592, Il Cortegiano was translated into French on three separate occasions, and a
total of twenty-three editions of the various translations were printed during that
time.
98
As for the social status of its readership, Burke readily acknowledges that
96
Peter Burke, The Fortunes of the Courtier: The European Reception of Castiglione’s Cortegiano
(University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1996), 3-4; quote from 3.
97
Burke, Fortunes of the Courtier, 6.
98
Burke, Fortunes of the Courtier, 63; see also Appendix 1, “Editions of the Courtier, 1528-1850.”
On the book’s popularity in sixteenth-century France, see Burke, Fortunes of the Courtier, 139;
74
reading does not necessarily follow from owning. He nonetheless has made a
substantial effort to winnow from ownership records that are unlikely to reflect
actual readership (library and auction catalogs, for example) a list of 328 individual
owners, the majority of whom probably did read the book.
99
From this list, he is able
to extrapolate that “the majority of readers … were male and legally noble,” the
latter category ranging from members of royal families all the way down through the
multiple layers of nobility to country gentlemen and newly minted anoblis.
100
When all of the above factors—that the first French translation of Il
Cortegiano was done at the behest of the French king as part of his program to
incorporate Italian culture into his court, that the Italian influence at the French court
remained strong at least until the death of Catherine de Médicis in 1589, that French
courtiers under the sixteenth-century Valois kings were under considerable pressure
to conform to the Italian model, that the beliefs and behaviors of the court nobility
almost always served as a model for the beliefs of the nobility more broadly—are
taken into consideration, it becomes far more reasonable than might originally have
been thought to claim that Castiglione’s text had a profound impact on the French
nobility’s beliefs concerning the meaning of noblesse. Burke’s caveats remain true
as well, of course: Castiglione’s model of aristocratic refinement represented far too
big a shift even for the court nobles, let alone the French nobility as a whole, to
Magendie, introduction to L’Honneste Homme, xiv; Nordhaus, “Arma et Litterae,” 101; Maurice
Magendie, La Politesse mondaine et les théories de l'honnêteté en France au XVII
e
siècle, de 1600 à
1650, 2 vols. (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1925), 1:308, 1:329.
99
Burke, “Readers of the Courtier before 1700,” Appendix 2 in Fortunes of the Courtier.
100
Burke, Fortunes of the Courtier, 143-152 (section entitled “The Sociology of Reception”); on
members of the French nobility in particular, 144-146; quote from 144.
75
embrace with no modifications. Even among the court nobles, it therefore did not
displace the existing warrior-knight model so much as merge with it and then gently
but persistently reorient it as time passed. The gradual refashioning of ideal and
practice at the top of the noble pyramid then slowly began to trickle down and to
influence the beliefs, if not the behaviors, of the noble collective.
Changes in the actual behavior of the nobles as a group, at least for the
purposes of the arguments made by this study, are less important than changes in
beliefs. Ideals by their very nature do not necessarily reflect actual practice: they
are something to which one aspires rather than something one realistically hopes to
achieve, so much so that the aspirations may remain forever in the realm of the mind
without ever having any impact on actual behavior at all. The medieval ideal of the
valiant knight acquitting himself heroically in battle, as against the tiny number of
nobles who actually served in the military (heroically or otherwise), once again
springs to mind. Similarly, refined and graceful “courtly” behavior became the early
modern ideal, but for the vast majority of nobles, this is all that it ever was.
As for the precise nature of Castiglione’s impact on noble beliefs, The Book
of the Courtier describes in great detail the characteristics of the perfect noble
courtier. While this individual has all the qualities included in the traditional French
nobility’s concept of vertu, he also has a whole new set of largely social graces that
reflect the heightened refinement of the Italian Renaissance. Among these new
characteristics, the two that receive the most attention are grazia (grace) and
sprezzatura—that certain attitude of nonchalantly poised self-confidence whose
76
primary purpose is to disguise the courtier’s efforts so that everything he does or
says appears to be natural and spontaneous. Both these ideas were adopted by the
French nobility almost exactly as they are expressed in Castiglione’s text.
Sprezzatura’s carefully contrived semblance of effortlessness and spontaneity
is inextricably intertwined with grazia. In Castiglione’s ideal, grace must pervade
every aspect of the courtier’s behavior, whether he is dancing, riding, walking,
fencing, dining, speaking, or just sitting around doing nothing in particular. Its
importance is reiterated with an almost drumbeat-like quality: “Above everything he
should temper all his movements with a certain good judgment and grace….”
“Everything he may do or say shall be stamped with grace.” “The Courtier must
accompany his actions, gestures, habits, in short his every movement, with grace.”
This is because grace is “an universal seasoning, without which all other properties
and good qualities are of little worth.”
101
Yet grace alone is not sufficient if it is not tempered with sprezzatura.
Indeed the universal rule concerning grace, one which is “worth more in this matter
than any other in all things human that are done or said,” is as follows:
To practise in everything a certain nonchalance [sprezzatura] that shall
conceal design and show that what is done and said is done without effort and
almost without thought. From this … grace is in large measure derived,
because everyone knows the difficulty of those things that are rare and well
done, and therefore facility in them excites the highest admiration; while on
the other hand, to strive … is extremely ungraceful, and makes us esteem
everything slightly, however great it be. Accordingly we may affirm … to be
true art [that] which does not appear to be art; nor to anything must we give
greater care than to conceal art, for if it is discovered, it quite destroys our
101
Castiglione, Book of the Courtier, 30, 31, 32, 32, respectively.
77
credit and brings us into small esteem…. The exhibition of art and study …
destroys the grace in everything.
102
Grace and sprezzatura are in fact so mutually dependent that the one almost cannot
exist without the other. Grace not only must permeate every aspect of the courtier’s
behavior at all times and in all endeavors, it also must do so in a sprezzata fashion.
The perfect courtier must be able to perform any act as if both the skill necessary to
the performance and the grace with which the act is performed are totally natural and
unaffected—something he does effortlessly, with no hint of the time and labor he
must have invested in learning to do so.
Over the course of the sixteenth century, the beliefs and behaviors of the
French court nobility gradually expanded to include the Castiglionesque notions of
grace and sprezzatura. By the end of the century, these new ideas were just
beginning to trickle down to the nobility as a whole, thus adding one more threat to a
belief system that already was under considerable pressure from other directions.
The fully armored, lance-armed heavy cavalryman was well on his way to becoming
obsolete, which negated that aspect of the existing definition of nobility that insisted
that noblesse was rooted in that particular type of military service. Virtue as a key
element of nobility, and especially that peculiarly martial vertu touted by the
traditional nobles, had suffered attacks from a variety of directions, all of which
called into question the viability of this quality as a necessary component of nobility.
Finally, both of these central characteristics that had defined nobility for centuries
were being supplanted (or at least overshadowed) by the new Italian ideal, which
102
Castiglione, Book of the Courtier, 34-35.
78
placed more emphasis on grace and sprezzatura than it did on military prowess and
martial vertu.
79
CHAPTER 2
The Nobility’s Response to the Challenges
Continuity, or Change?
By the end of the sixteenth century, all of the challenges outlined in the
previous chapter had combined to make many traditional French nobles believe that
their order’s role and standing in society were in serious danger. In response to the
various threats to its longstanding beliefs about the meaning of noblesse, the nobility
slowly began to shift those beliefs in ways that ultimately would result in a new self-
perception and definition.
It is important to stress that the reconfiguration of a complex and
multilayered set of collective self-perceptions is a gradual and nonlinear process.
Longstanding cultural icons tend to have enormous inertia; change, when it happens,
occurs very slowly. Often those who would benefit most from change are also those
most attached to the icon in its existing form, so change frequently is slowed yet
further by the reluctance of those who logically should be its most ardent proponents.
Certainly the traditional French nobility in the late sixteenth century was faced with
precisely this situation. By that time, both the various elements that comprised the
definition of nobility and the relationship between those elements had been in place
for so long that the nobles as a group simply could not grasp the concept that other,
equally legitimate ways of defining noblesse might exist or—worse yet—eventually
might supplant their own. To their credit, however, the traditional nobles certainly
80
were aware that the way in which nobility had been defined for centuries was being
challenged, and, no matter how reluctantly, they did respond to that challenge.
It is equally important to emphasize that responses of the sort about to be
outlined—that is, a collective response to an accumulation of cultural shifts that have
occurred over a long period of time—are not decided at a conscious level. At no
point, for example, did the late sixteenth-century French nobles as a group suddenly
decide that they needed to do this or that in order to protect themselves from what
they perceived to be a threat to their traditional self-perception and definition and
thus to their existence as a social order. As already discussed in the Introduction,
however, recent scholarship has demonstrated that, over the course of the late
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the nobility as a whole did both reconfigure the
way in which it defined itself and adapt successfully to the various military, political,
social, and cultural changes that occurred during that time.
This assessment would imply “change” as the nobility’s primary response
mechanism and tends to be supported by the examination of actual noble behavior.
When noble beliefs are examined, on the other hand, surprising continuities often
emerge. Beliefs, unlike behaviors, reside largely in the realm of the ideal and
therefore often can be retained, albeit sometimes in modified form, in the face of
apparently contradictory realities. One of the goals of this study is to show the ways
in which the traditional nobility unconsciously manipulated existing beliefs (and
even certain existing behaviors) in ways that allowed those beliefs to retain their
relevance in the context of new and unavoidable realities, thus providing nobles with
81
a transitional “comfort zone” between their old warrior ethic and their new courtly
one. Comparison of certain traditional beliefs with certain “new” behaviors will
reveal many continuities hiding behind apparent changes. This study will argue that,
at least during the early stages of this transition from old beliefs and behaviors to
new ones, many seemingly new behaviors were in fact permeated with old beliefs.
The continued presence of familiar ideas allowed the traditional nobles to continue to
manifest and display their status in ways that had meaning to them, while the
modification of certain behaviors through which those beliefs were manifested and
displayed simultaneously allowed them to adapt to changing circumstances.
In assessing the traditional French nobility’s transition from an essentially
medieval identity to an identity that was more responsive to its actual circumstances,
and particularly in assessing the role played therein by horsemanship, a number of
issues must be kept in mind. First, there were many factors at play in this lengthy
and convoluted transition, and horsemanship affected only a small number of them.
Second, the initial stages of the transition occurred primarily among the court nobles
and only very gradually trickled down to the rest of the nobility. Much of what
follows, especially material that applies to actual behavioral changes in the late
sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, applies almost exclusively to this limited
subset of the nobility. Third, the way in which various elements defining noblesse
changed was by no means uniform, and it indubitably differed based on the context.
This study looks at those changes only in the context of specific types of mounted
82
activities; it does not claim that the arguments it makes will apply in other areas of
noble culture, although there almost certainly are places where they overlap.
103
With those caveats in mind, several generalizations can be made about the
ways in which the traditional French nobility’s self-perception and definition began
to change toward the end of the sixteenth century. None of the elements comprising
the existing definition was jettisoned altogether, but the emphasis placed on some of
them shifted, thus increasing or decreasing their importance within the overall mix.
In other cases, the form in which an element traditionally had been manifested was
slightly modified, and the venue in which it traditionally had appeared was relocated.
Even some of the new elements that had been added to the noble ideal by the end of
the sixteenth century were blended with and incorporated into existing ideas rather
than being forcefully grafted onto them. In virtually all cases, there was thus a
combination of continuity and change.
103
One area that comes to mind almost immediately is dueling. To take but one example, Neuschel,
Word of Honor, 206, says: “On the one hand, the staged violence of a duel could be characteriezed as
a shrill, extreme claim to honor … [which] was increasingly disconnected from real military power….
On the other hand, dueling also represented the perpetuation of the system of honor described here. It
was closely bound in practice to a routine of manners and courtesy by which equals mutually
sustained each other’s honor.” Much the same thing can be said about manège equitation and the
dramatic and dangerous airs relevés: On the one hand, the high airs in particular were a “shrill claim”
to martial vertu, as the latter increasingly was disconnected from the nobles’ military role. On the
other hand, horsemanship more generally also represented the perpetuation of a “system” of vertu, as
it was closely bound in practice to those types of virtue that always had been displayed best and most
gloriously in a mounted context. See also the discussion of armed combat (in battle or in a duel) in
Smith, Culture of Merit, 37-40. In this passage, a similar terminological “swap” can be made:
battlefield or dueling ground becomes manège, fighting becomes horsemanship or the airs relevés,
generosity or merit becomes virtue, and many of the things Smith has to say—including the
references to the need for spectators—transfer quite neatly.
83
The General Response
Although not all of the challenges to the nobility’s existing identity and self-
perception were related to recent anoblis and non-nobles in the process of ascension
into the nobility, certainly many of them were. Contemporary noble rhetoric
indicates that the traditional nobles were highly indignant about the encroachment
into their order of new men who had achieved their status in ways other than that
sanctioned by their definition of nobility.
104
As a result, one of the unconscious
impulses behind the shifts in emphasis, modifications, and relocations of certain
aspects of that definition was the desire to exclude those who threatened to topple—
or at least to expand—the meaning of nobility as the traditional nobles understood it.
Any individual element in the existing definition of nobility that had lost its
ability clearly to differentiate the truly noble from the merely aspirant experienced a
decrease in emphasis in comparison to other elements. Almost all of the attributes
traditionally associated with a noble lifestyle as well as many of the privileges
supposedly reserved to the nobility easily could be (and were being) usurped by
wealthy non-nobles and recent anoblis. Things that formerly had served to identify
immediately a person of noble status—specific types of clothing, certain forms of
address, special coats of arms, ownership of fiefs, the right to carry a sword, even tax
exemption and other legally mandated privileges—had lost their exclusivity and thus
104
For some examples of contemporary noble rhetoric indicating their indignation regarding anoblis
who had been granted nobility for reasons other than military service, see Baumgartner, France in the
Sixteenth Century, 152, 161; Constant, “Absolutisme et modernité,” 146; Devyver, Sang épuré, 7, 65-
66, 78 n. 74, 81-82; Jouanna, Devoir de révolte, 91; Jouanna, “Gros et gras,” 66-67; Jouanna,
“Perception et appréciation,” 18-20; Lazard, Brantôme, 12; Major, Renaissance Monarchy, 105-106;
Smith, Culture of Merit, 13. Specifically on this issue as expressed in the noble cahiers for the
Estates General of 1614, see n. 110, below.
84
much of their value as signs or symbols of nobility, or at least of nobility that had its
roots in the use of a sword in battle rather than a pen in office. As a result of this
decline in the reliability of lifestyle and privileges as visible indications of legitimate
noblesse, social recognition also lost its usefulness as an element defining nobility.
While it would be absurd to assert that traditional nobles ceased to participate in
living nobly, to be recognized as noble by the larger social collective, or to benefit
from their legal and customary privileges, those elements generally became less
critical as determinants of nobility and gradually were de-emphasized in favor of
other elements that better served the nobility’s dual goals of exclusion and
differentiation.
105
Of all the various elements that traditionally had combined to define nobility,
noble ancestry was the one that most definitively excluded both non-nobles and
recent anoblis and therefore most clearly differentiated “true” nobles from the rest of
society. Genuine nobility of birth was a quality that could be neither claimed nor
purchased by those who were not fortunate enough to be blessed with it from the
outset, and faking it was considerably more difficult than simply trying to “pass” as
noble by adopting or obtaining the elements comprising a noble lifestyle. As noted
in the previous chapter, for traditional nobles birth always had been the principle and
most important “real” factor determining who was noble and who was not. In the
past, however, noble ancestry had been a largely assumed given; once the traditional
105
On the decreasing emphasis on lifestyle, privileges, and social recognition as factors determining
nobility from the late sixteenth century on, Schalk, “Old and New Marques de Noblesse and the
Diminished Importance of Nobility in the First Half of the Seventeenth Century,” chap. 7 in Valor to
Pedigree, is particularly helpful.
85
nobility began to feel threatened by the influx into the noble order of increasing
numbers of new men, it was acknowledged far more overtly. Many scholars already
have noted this dramatic increase in the emphasis on ancestry as a defining
characteristic of nobility during the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries.
106
As several of them have pointed out, the criterion of birth served the traditional
nobility particularly well during this period, when many other customary attributes
of nobility were becoming increasingly easy to usurp, because noble descent drew a
firm line between those who possessed it and those who did not. Because noble birth
was simultaneously the most exclusive and the least accessible element defining
nobility, it rapidly became the single most important element in that definition.
107
Despite the increase in the importance of noble birth, neither military
prowess nor martial vertu disappeared from the mix of ingredients that traditionally
had defined nobility. Instead, these elements were subjected to a combination of a
shift in emphasis, a modification of form, and a relocation of context. For example,
the role of personal military service—that is, military service performed within the
lifetime of the nobleman in question—experienced a shift in emphasis. As already
106
See, for example, Devyver, Sang épuré, 215; Dewald, Aristocratic Experience, 7-8, 15, 207;
Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 11, 205-206; Smith, Culture of Merit, 12, 57, 91; Mark Greengrass, France
in the Age of Henri IV: The Struggle for Stability, 2
nd
ed. (London: Longman, 1995), 235.
107
For evidence of the use of birth as a means specifically of differentiating the genuinely noble from
those who merely aspired to be, see Devyver, Sang épuré, 56, 100-101; Dewald, Aristocratic
Experience, 207; Mettam, Power and Faction, 74; Smith, Culture of Merit, 14, 57. Schalk, “The
Separation of Virtue and Nobility and the Absolutist State in the First Half of the Seventeenth
Century,” chap. 6 in Valor to Pedigree, cites a large number of writers from the first half of the
seventeenth century whose work stresses both the growing importance of birth in defining nobility
and the use of birth specifically for purposes of differentiation. The relevance of his citations to the
argument of this study is hampered, however, by the fact that he interprets them through the lens of
his own thesis that virtue was dropped completely from noble definition during this period and
replaced by birth. The views of the authors Schalk cites therefore must be separated from his
interpretation of them in order to remain relevant to the argument at hand.
86
discussed, true heavy cavalry had been sidelined by changes in the conduct of
warfare, including increased reliance on infantry and less prestigious forms of
mounted troops, so fewer noblemen were able to serve in the fashion that
traditionally had been associated with nobility. As a result, personal performance of
military service had become far more difficult to achieve, and its central importance
as an element defining what it meant to be noble was commensurately de-
emphasized.
Given the longstanding and intimate connections between military service
and martial vertu, one logically might assume that, when the emphasis shifted away
from personal military service and toward birth, a shift in emphasis away from virtue
would have to follow.
108
That was, however, not the case. Both vertu and military
service had been central factors determining nobility for more than two hundred
years by the end of the sixteenth century. While it is true that personal military
service was unavoidably de-emphasized, martial prowess in its broader sense had
played such a central role in the nobility’s beliefs about the meaning of noblesse for
such a long time that a drastic de-emphasis of its importance would have been almost
too big a shift for the nobles’ cultural construct to sustain. De-emphasizing military
service and martial vertu simultaneously would have been even more unsettling and
disorienting to the nobility during a period in which it already was struggling to
retain and defend its traditional identity on so many different fronts. These two key
108
This is precisely the argument that Schalk makes in Valor to Pedigree—an argument with which
this study firmly disagrees.
87
elements of noble self-perception and definition therefore were not jettisoned but
instead were modified and relocated in both time and space.
The relocation in time was achieved by invoking the concept of heritability—
what some scholars call race.
109
This concept allowed the nobility to circumvent the
decrease in opportunities for noblemen to personally demonstrate their vertu in
heavy cavalry combat by shifting the onus of demonstration from the present to the
past—from their own lifetime to that of their ancestors. The logic behind this
argument had its roots in the nobility’s firm conviction that the only legitimate kind
of noblesse was that which had its origins in an act of great valor in battle.
110
Although this belief was by no means a new one, from the late sixteenth century on
109
The most notable scholarship on race theory is Devyver’s Sang épuré and Jouanna’s “Idée de
race”; many of Jouanna’s other books and articles also discuss this subject. See also Labatut, “La
Naissance et la famille,” chap. 1 of pt. 2 in Noblesses européennes; Robin Briggs, “From the German
Forests to Civil Society: The Frankish Myth and the Ancient Constitution in France,” in Civil
Histories: Essays Presented to Sir Keith Thomas, ed. Peter Burke, Brian Harrison, and Paul Slack
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000). Smith, Culture of Merit, 63, follows the semantic trail of
the ways in which terms such as naissance, race, and sang were defined by contemporaries as a
means of accessing the logic behind the concept of heritability.
110
Witness, for example, the traditional nobility’s continued insistence at the 1614 Estates General
that noble status be reserved exclusively for those who originally had been ennobled in recognition of
valorous military service. On this belief as expressed in its cahiers on that occasion, see
Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 263; Chartier, “Etats généraux de 1614,” 121-123;
Constant, “Absolutisme et modernité,” 156; Constant, “Structures de l’anoblissement,” 53; André
Corvisier, “La Paix nécessaire mais incertaine, 1598-1635,” in Contamine, Histoire militaire à 1715,
348-349. For contemporary evidence of the continued importance of military service more generally
in seventeenth-century noble self-perception and definition, see Chartier, “Etats généraux de 1614,”
120-121, and Jouanna, “Gentilshommes français,” 38-39 (both citing various noble cahiers prepared
for the 1614 Estates General); Devyver, Sang épuré, 189 n. 27 (citing Paul Hay de Chastelet, Traité
de la politique de la France, 1669); Faret, Honneste Homme, 42 (1630); Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 10
(citing David Rivault de Flurance, Le Dessein d’une académie et de l’introduction d’icelle à la cour,
1612, and Marc de la Béraudière, Le Combat de seul à seul en camp clos, 1608), 203 (citing Pelletier,
La Nourriture de la noblesse, 1604); Smith, Culture of Merit, 38 (citing Claude de Marois, Le
Gentilhomme parfaict, 1631). Pelletier’s first name is variously cited, both in the secondary literature
and in online library catalogs, as Pierre, Thomas, Claude, or Jean; because of these variations, only
the surname is cited here.
88
the traditional nobles articulated it far more explicitly than they ever had in the past,
largely in reaction to the rise of the civil or bureaucratic nobility.
Numerous scholars have commented on the nobility’s continued insistence,
despite what might seem contradictory realities, that its military service was the basis
of its status.
111
The following selection of quotes ranging from the late sixteenth to
the late seventeenth century attests to the enduring nature of the nobility’s conviction
on this issue: In 1595, Jean Bacquet says, “In France it is generally considered that
the premier and authentic nobles acquired noble status at the cost of their blood,
bearing arms for the protection and defense of the realm.”
112
In 1630, Nicolas Faret
comments, “It seems to me that there is no [profession] more appropriate nor more
essential to a Gentleman that that of arms…. It is primarily through arms that
nobility is acquired, it is also through arms that it should be maintained….”
113
In
1651, one of the noble cahiers prepared for the planned but never held Estates
General states, “The premier nobility are those who spring from a noble line, whose
predecessors have always lived nobly, performing the actions and profession of
nobility, having acquired [their status] by spilling their blood … and performing the
111
See, for example, Duindam, Myths of Power, 52; Jouanna, “Gros et gras,” 34; Mettam, “French
Nobility,” 118; Mettam, Power and Faction, 73-74; Rice, “Humanism in France,” 119; Wood
Nobility of Bayeux, 71-72.
112
“[E]n France communément on estime que les premiers et vrais nobles ont acquis le degré de
noblesse au prix de leur sang, portant les armes pour la protection et la défense du Royaume….” Jean
Bacquet, Traité des droits de francs-fiefs, de nouveaux acquets, d’annoblissement et d’amortissement
[1595], in Les Œuvres, ed. Claude de Ferrière (Paris: Osmont, 1688), no page number given, cited by
Devyver, Sang épuré, 101-102 n. 159.
113
“Il me semble qu’il n’y en a point de plus honneste, ny de plus essentielle à un Gentil-homme que
celle des armes…. C’est par les armes principalement que la Noblesse s’acquiert, c’est par les armes
aussi qu’elle se doit conserver….” Faret, Honneste Homme, 12.
89
profession of arms.”
114
In 1669, Alexandre Belleguise opines, “To live nobly is to
bear arms, to serve the prince in time of war, to fill the ranks of captain, lieutenant,
ensign.”
115
In 1678, Gilles-André de la Roque still affirms that “nobility is born with
arms, it is increased in the exercise of war.”
116
Simply insisting that military service was the basis for the nobility’s status
and privileges could not, however, counter the arguments of those who pointed out
that very few nobles actually served. In response, the nobles maintained that it was
their potential to serve that justified their current standing, a potential that was linked
directly to their conviction that true noblesse stemmed from an act of extraordinary
valor in combat. Given the centrality of valor to the nobles’ understanding of vertu,
this conviction presupposed not only great virtue but virtue of a very specific type.
According to the theory of heritability, no matter how distant the ancestor who had
performed the original and ennobling act of valor, the qualities of virtue that had
made that act possible had passed without fail from generation to generation ever
since. Pierre de Dampmartin, writing in 1585, stresses this heritable nature of
martial vertu, saying that valor
114
“La premiere [noblesse] sont ceux qui sont issus de noble lignée, les prédécesseurs desquels ont
toujours vescu noblement faisant acte et profession de noblesse, l’ayant acquise par l’effusion de leur
sang …, et faisant profession des armes.” Requeste de la noblesse [1651], in Choix de Mazarinades,
ed. C. Moreau, 2 vols. (Paris: Renouard, 1853), no page number given, cited by Devyver, Sang épuré,
101 n. 159.
115
“[V]ivre noblement est porter les armes, servir le prince en temps de guerre, remplir les charges de
capitaine[,] lieutenant[,] enseigne.” Alexandre Belleguise, Traité de la noblesse et de son origine,
suivant les préjugés rendus par les Commissaires, députez pour la vérification des titres de noblesse
[1669] (Paris: Jacques Morel, 1700), no page number noted, cited by Constant, “Absolutisme et
modernité,” 198.
116
“La noblesse est née avec les armes, elle s’augmente dans l’exercice de la guerre.” Gilles-André
de la Roque, Traité de la noblesse et de toutes ses différentes espèces [1678] (Rouen: Pierre Le
Boucher et Jore père et fils, 1734), 251, cited by Devyver, Sang épuré, 447.
90
comes through the bloodline to gentlemen of noble family, whose fathers and
ancestors have always frequented the profession of war. For the children
receive by virtue of their seed that temperament of assurance and courage
that their fathers have acquired by their habit and occupation of arms….
117
In 1584, Louis Ernaud equates nobility of birth to “a natural dexterity and aptitude
for virtue, which children have transferred from their progenitors since birth.”
Courtesy of this heritage, they “feel within themselves a noble soul, a well born
heart, natural enemy of vice, admirer and amateur of virtue.”
118
Nearly a hundred
years later, Hermann-François de Malte is still expressing similar views regarding
the heritable nature of valeur and vertu. He says that the nobleman “who has
acquired nobility and glory through virtuous and heroic actions transmits through his
blood the seeds of valor and virtue.”
119
According to the principles of heritability, it did not matter if the descendants
of the ancestor who had performed the original ennobling act of valor never served
in the military. The legacy of martial vertu bequeathed by that ancestor guaranteed
that all male members of his line inherited the qualities necessary for successful
performance in war. His descendants therefore always stood ready to take up their
117
Valor “vient comme de race aux gentilshommes de maison, de qui les pères et ancêtres ont
toujours hanté le métier de la guerre. Car les enfants reçoivent par la vertu de la semence ce
tempérament d’assurance et courage que leurs pères avaient acquis par l’habitude et hantise des
armes….” Pierre de Dampmartin, De la Connoissance et merveilles du monde et de l’homme (Paris:
Th. Perier, 1585), f. 110
v
, cited by Jouanna, Ordre social, 8.
118
Noblesse de race “est une naturelle habileté, et disposition à vertu, laquelle les enfans ont apportée
de leurs progéniteurs, dès la naissance: comme nous voyons qui ne retiennent pas seulement la forme
du corps, et les traicts de la face de leurs parens, mais aussi ressentent en eux une ame genereuse, un
cœur bien né, ennemi natural du vice, admirateur et amateur de vertu.” Louis Ernaud, Discours de la
noblesse et des justes moyens d’y parvenir (Caen: B. Macé, 1584), f. 24
v
, cited by Jouanna, “Idée de
race,” 72.
119
“Qui s’est acquis la noblesse et la gloire par des actions vertueuses et héroïques transmet avec le
sang des semences de valeur et de vertu.” Hermann-François de Malte, Les Nobles dans les
tribunaux, traité de droit enrichi de plusieurs curiosités utiles de l’histoire et du blazon (Liège:
Guillaume Henry Streel, 1680), 11, cited by Devyver, Sang épuré, 103.
91
weapons whenever circumstances might require them to do so; whether they ever
had an opportunity to personally exercise those qualities or to wield those weapons
was irrelevant. By simultaneously stressing the previous military service of their
ancestors and the potential military service of themselves and even their descendants,
the traditional nobles were able to continue to claim that that service justified their
status and privileges, even if very few of them currently were performing any
military function whatsoever.
120
The explicit clarification of the relationship between the military service of
an ancestor and the current noble status of his descendants allowed the nobles to
retain at least the idea of military service as part of the what defined nobility. The
concept of heritability more generally also dovetailed with the nobility’s increased
emphasis on noble birth as the most important determinant of nobility. Perhaps most
importantly, however, the heritability argument allowed the nobles not only to retain
vertu as a crucial quality of noblesse but to reaffirm their very specific definition of
vertu, thus countering many of the threats to this key element of noble identity.
Because heritability made noble status dependent on an act of great valor in battle, it
120
For additional quotes from primary sources revealing the nobles’ heightened emphasis on the
valorous deeds of their ancestors and the heritability of noble vertu as a justification for their own
status and privileges, see Corvisier, “Noblesse militaire,” 336-337 (citing La Roque, Traité de la
noblesse, 1678); Devyver, Sang épuré, 102 (citing Malte, Nobles dans les tribunaux, 1680) and 202
(citing Marois, Le Gentilhomme parfaict, 1631); Jouanna, Ordre social, 57 (citing Ernaud, Discours
de la noblesse, 1584) and 191 (citing an anonymous pamphlet, Responce à la blaspheme et
calomnieuse remonstrance de Maistre Matthieu de Launoy, chanoine de Soissons …, 1591); Saulx,
Mémoires, 8:54-56 (ca. 1610); Smith, Culture of Merit, 64 (citing Nicolas Pasquier, Le Gentilhomme,
1611). For comments of other scholars on this issue, see Devyver, Sang épuré, 104; Duindam, Myths
of Power, 52; Jouanna, “Gentilshommes français,” 23-25; Jouanna, Ordre social, 56-57; Labatut,
Noblesses européennes, 86; Mettam, Power and Faction, 74; Nordhaus, “Arma et Litterae,” 11-12;
Rice, “Humanism in France,” 119.
92
invalidated any type of virtue other than that which was derived in some way from
military prowess. It therefore undermined the arguments of those who had dared to
suggest that nobility legitimately might be based on virtues other than that particular
type. This explicit articulation of the relationship between birth and virtue also
countered the arguments of those who claimed that birth alone was an insufficient
justification for nobility and that only those who actively and continuously
demonstrated their personal virtue merited noble status. According to the logic
behind the theory of heritability, nobility of birth and the only genuinely “noble”
form of virtue were nearly synonymous: one could not have noble ancestry without
possessing vertu or possess vertu without having noble ancestry.
121
As with the beliefs that birth was the primary determinant of noble status or
that noble status had to be based on an act of valor, the belief in the symbiosis
between ancestry and virtue was not a new idea: the two qualities always had been
intertwined in the traditional nobility’s belief system, but the relationship between
them now was being articulated more explicitly and stressed more emphatically. By
making birth and virtue hopelessly symbiotic, the nobles were able to recoup—at
least in their own minds—both the content and the exclusivity of this key element of
121
Smith, Culture of Merit, 62-65, 78, is particularly enlightening regarding the logic behind the
intimate and symbiotic relationship between birth and virtue. He points out: “At first glance it seems
reasonable to conclude that, in contrast to their sixteenth-century counterparts, commentators on
nobility in the early seventeenth century described noble status as the result not of virtue but of birth
and pedigree. When its ambiguities are closely examined, however, the contemporary lexicon reveals
that the concepts of birth and virtue could communicate similar ideas, and that emphasis on pedigree
may have been a way of affirming a specific and traditional set of moral qualities” (Culture of Merit,
64).
93
their definition, thus allowing it to continue to be one of the central components of
noble definition.
122
The idea that birth and virtue could mean similar things is foreign to the
modern mind, and it has led some scholars to misinterpret the beliefs and behaviors
of the traditional nobility during this period. The older “crisis” historians tended to
view the nobles’ continued emphasis on military service and their increased
emphasis on birth as defensive reactions to circumstances outside their control:
rather than change, they simply fell back on old and largely obsolete arguments in a
vain attempt to justify a status they no longer deserved. Among more recent
scholars, Schalk argues that, far from refusing to change with the times, the
traditional nobles jettisoned military service and martial virtue as defining factors
and replaced them with the more “modern” concept of nobility based solely on birth.
Other recent scholarship, however, has shown that a large part of our failure to
understand the nobles’ beliefs and behaviors is because of our tendency to look at
those beliefs and behaviors through modern eyes, rather than trying to get far enough
122
The sources already cited above in nn. 117-120, from Dampmartin and Ernaud in the 1580s to
Malte and La Roque a hundred years later, attest to the fact that vertu retained both its martial content
and its crucial importance as an element in the definition of nobility. On the persistence into the
seventeenth century of the traditional nobility’s conception of vertu as consisting of qualities that
would be particularly useful in a military context, Smith is particularly useful; see Culture of Merit,
37-38, 45-47. Smith also offers late seventeenth-century definitions, drawn from two contemporary
dictionaries (Antoine Furetière’s 1690 Dictionnaire universel and the 1694 ed. of the Dictionnaire de
l’Académie Française), of a whole series of qualities that were considered to be part of noble vertu;
see Culture of Merit, 28-31. The consistency of the definitions of these terms across several centuries,
and despite all the changes in the nobility’s circumstances over that period, reveals the depth of the
nobility’s belief in these qualities as essential elements in defining what it meant to be noble. For
additional evidence both of the way in which contemporaries defined virtue and of the consistency of
that definition over several hundred years, see s.v. “vertu” in Dictionnaire de l’ancienne langue
française … du XI
e
au XV
e
siècle, ed. Frédéric Godefroy (Paris: F. Vieweg, 1881-1902); Dictionnaire
de la langue française du XVI
e
siècle, ed. Edmond Huguet (Paris: E. Champioin, 1925-1973);
Dictionnaire du Grand Siècle, ed. François Bluche (Paris: Fayard, 1990).
94
inside the minds of our subjects to look at them from the perspective of a
contemporary.
123
When scholars succeed in doing so, a rather different picture
emerges. As Smith points out:
It may well be right to assume that the nobility’s growing emphasis on
pedigree reflected its impression of an increasingly fluid, and thus less
certain, social order. To interpret this response as defensive resistance to
change, however, one must assume that seventeenth-century nobles
subscribed to an inferior and obsolete belief system, and that they somehow
sensed that their values were being overtaken by others whose superiority
they could not deny. This chronological and conceptual dichotomy is
problematic both because it implies that an older mentality is somehow less
legitimate than a newer one and because it exaggerates the semantic distance
that separated the concepts of birth, virtue, and merit in the early-modern
period.
124
As the work of Smith and others has shown, what may look utterly
contradictory to us did not look that way at all to the traditional early modern French
nobility.
125
If we fail to recognize this, we never will be able to understand how this
group could simultaneously increase its emphasis on the importance of noble birth
123
This is precisely the problem with Schalk’s argument in Valor to Pedigree, which is hampered by
reading modern meanings into contemporary terms. “Birth” and “virtue” mean two completely
different things today, whereas to an early modern French nobleman the concepts those words
represented often communicated similar or even identical ideas. Because Schalk fails to recognize the
synonymy of these terms, he also fails to recognize that the nobility’s increased emphasis on birth was
intimately connected to its beliefs regarding traditional vertu.
124
Smith, Culture of Merit, 62. Elsewhere, Smith makes a similarly insightful point in reference to
the pitfalls of reading modern meanings back onto birth and virtue, or merit as he prefers to call it:
“One needs to concede to seventeenth-century nobles that they, at least, knew what they were talking
about, and that the best way to ascertain the meaning of noble discourse is to penetrate the surface
contradictions in the rhetoric while shedding our own prejudices. To the modern reader, it is the merit
implied in the context of the robin world that resonates. Hard work and dedication, experience,
educational achievement, demonstrable ability—in short, tangible credentials—these are what
constitute merit. But given the persistent, and insistent, association of the ideas of birth and merit in
noble discourse throughout the seventeenth century and beyond, is it not important to suppose that
nobles indeed lived in a ‘conceptual world’ where birth and merit were thought to be compatible, even
synonymous?” (Culture of Merit, 17; emphasis his).
125
Neuschel also has much of value to say on the issues of seeing contradiction where in fact there is
none as a result of reading the past through modern eyes; see, for example, Word of Honor, 14-15, 21,
197, 202.
95
and yet continue to insist that vertu was its most defining attribute and that military
service was the justification for its status. One of the goals of this study is to show
not only that the nobles did indeed continue to cling to the ideals of virtue and
military prowess but also why they did so and, of course, how they used
horsemanship as a means to achieve that goal.
In addition to invoking the concept of heritability, the other major way in
which the nobility was able to compensate for the problems with continuing to claim
that military service and martial vertu were crucial qualities of noblesse was to
modify the forms and relocate the contexts in which these qualities were displayed.
For the purposes of this study, this response mechanism is of particular interest for
two reasons. First, while numerous other scholars have discussed the heritability
aspect of the nobility’s response to the challenges it faced by the end of the sixteenth
century, very few have looked in any systematic way at the concepts of modification
and relocation.
126
Second, horsemanship was without a doubt one of the traditional
noble attributes that leant itself best to these concepts and therefore illustrates
especially well how they functioned.
Although it is true that there was not much that could be done to reverse the
increasing obsolescence of traditional heavy cavalry, many of the skills and qualities
associated with this type of mounted military service could be demonstrated in forms
other than heavy cavalry combat and in contexts other than a battlefield. As a result,
126
Several scholars do touch on these issues; see, for example, Dewald, Aristocratic Experience, 43;
Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 8; Neuschel, Word of Honor, 204; Nordhaus, “Arma et
Litterae,” 72.
96
these skills and qualities could be and were transferred to nonmilitary or pseudo-
military formats and venues. This modification and relocation of military prowess
helped ease the unavoidable loss of personal military service as one of the central
facets of noble identity. Compared to heavy cavalry service, vertu was an even more
flexible concept and thus had even better potential to benefit from modification and
relocation. After all, the nobles never had claimed that virtue could be manifested
only in battle; they merely had insisted that it could be shown to its best advantage in
that context. The qualities comprising noble vertu in theory could and did pervade
all a nobleman’s actions, military or otherwise. As already indicated above, the
traditional nobility responded to the various threats to the order’s particular
conception of virtue, not by ceasing to tout this quality as one of its most important
defining characteristics, but instead by reaffirming the ties between vertu and
noblesse.
In order to achieve this reaffirmation, however, vertu had to be disengaged
from its former, predominantly military context. One aspect of this disengagement
was that elements of virtue that could be demonstrated fully in nonmilitary venues
experienced an increase in emphasis. Attributes such as courtesy, selflessness,
generosity, liberality, magnanimity, and honorable behavior gradually became more
important. By the end of the sixteenth century—at least among the court nobility—
this subtle restructuring of vertu to emphasize its non-martial aspects had merged
with the various new, more courtly qualities that had been added to the noble
97
construct as part of the ongoing process of redefinition.
127
Eventually, this more
refined set of characteristics would supersede martial vertu as the defining feature of
noblesse.
One of the primary vehicles for instilling and polishing a number of these
new attributes was a new type of school, supposedly exclusively for those of noble
extraction, called the académie.
128
The first academy was established in Paris in
1594, and many others, in both the capital and the provinces, soon followed. The
curriculum at these institutions included instruction in various more traditionally
academic subjects such as history, government, politics, military theory, and
mathematics, but it also devoted a considerable amount of time to instruction in the
courtly arts of dance, fencing, vaulting, gymnastics, horsemanship, conversation,
comportment, and—most importantly—the grace and sprezzatura needed to perform
all of these activities in a manner appropriate to a gentleman. Of all these courtly
qualities, physical grace and the appearance of effortless execution were particularly
emphasized in the academy curriculum, as this aspect of noble education was
perhaps the least accessible to the non-nobility and thus was one of the most
127
Wintroub, “Words, Deeds, and a Womanly King,” 396, already notes this trend during the reign of
Henri III (1574-1589). In her examination of late sixteenth-century treatises on noble education,
Jouanna demonstrates that this blurring of existing non-martial qualities of noble vertu with newer,
more courtly qualities such as “natural” grace and effortlessness already is beginning to appear in the
literary evidence by the 1580s. According to Jouanna, the authors of these texts indicate: “La vertu
du ‘bien né’ ne sent pas l’effort; elle a une élégance, une grâce qui la font paraître presque entièrement
naturelle…. [L]a nourriture … aide sa vertu à s’affirmer; mais c’est la nature qui lui permet
d’atteindre à cette perfection, à cette aisance souveraine qui caractérisent un être accompli.” Jouanna,
Ordre social, 29-30; see also 43.
128
Contemporary sources that mention these schools are virtually all languaged in a way that indicates
that the académies were intended for nobles only. Numerous examples from a variety of sources,
including full references, are given in chap. 3, “The History of Manège Equitation in France,”
subsections “The French Académies” and “The Académie Curriculum,” which also discuss these
institutions in more detail.
98
important in terms of differentiation. Ultimately, the art of conducting oneself in a
naturally elegant and seemingly nonchalant fashion at all times and under all
circumstances became one of the most crucial marques of a true gentilhomme.
Noble academies served several important purposes for the nobility. Because
these institutions purported to exclude anyone who was not blessed with noble
ancestry, and because they were the only schools at which their particular
combination of subjects was offered under one roof, they prevented non-nobles and
recent anoblis from readily accessing the types of skills and knowledge taught at
them. The type of education a nobleman could obtain in one of these institutions
therefore served to distinguish the genuinely noble from the merely aspirant, so the
académie supported the nobility’s dual goals of increased differentiation and
exclusion. The distinctive type of “culture” that resulted from an academy education
included not only a unique set of skills and knowledge but also what might be termed
the art of comporting oneself like a gentleman. The académiste emerged from his
studies with new levels of politesse, courtoisie, civilité, bienséance, bonnes mœurs,
grâce, and sprezzatura—that is, with the graceful, decorous, becoming, polished
manner of living, behaving, and speaking in a fashion befitting an authentic
gentilhomme. As a result—and again, primarily among the court nobility and the
highest echelons of the provincial nobility—an academy education and the unique
99
culture that resulted from it in and of themselves rapidly gained a place as crucial
attributes of the “new” nobleman.
129
Despite this indisputable new emphasis on skills and behaviors more suitable
for the court than the battlefield, the more militant aspects of noble identity were far
from obsolete. Both military prowess and the martial aspects of vertu had been so
central for so long to the definition of nobility that it would have been impossible to
jettison them entirely. While it is true that some of these attributes were downplayed
somewhat, many of them simply were relocated to venues other than the battlefield.
As will be shown below, some of the most useful of those venues were the riding
arenas and mounted games fields of the noble académies, because one of the most
important vehicles for the modification and relocation of both military skills and
martial vertu was the nobility’s longstanding battlefield companion, the horse.
The Mounted Response
Just as it was believed that the more militant components of virtue were
displayed most gloriously when a nobleman was fulfilling his military function, so it
also was believed that, for a nobleman, “fulfilling his military function” would
involve being on horseback. As a result, over time the simple fact of being mounted
rather than being on foot had become just as integral a part of the definition of
129
Motley cites a 1596 letter, written by the duc de la Force to his wife, which indicates that court
nobles already were expected to adhere to this ideal at a time when education in the “courtly” arts at a
domestic académie was only just becoming available. In his letter, the duke comments on the
amazing levels of grace to be seen at court, even in young children, and says that he must arrange to
teach their own children to ride and dance before taking them there, as otherwise people will make
fun of them. Motley notes: “For La Force, and for many others, the academy … proved the ideal
solution.” Duc de la Force, Le Maréchal de la Force, un serviteur de sept rois, vol. 1 (Paris: Emile-
Paul Frères, 1924), 153-155, cited by Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 142.
100
noblesse as the elements of military service and noble vertu. Delcampe and Menou,
two of the noble riding masters whose manuals are used for this study, both comment
on the links between horses, horsemanship, and noblesse; here Delcampe is
speaking:
The greatest lords and the smallest gentlemen, as well as the lowliest soldiers,
become, courtesy of the strength and dexterity of their horses, noble,
powerful, brave, and illustrious: this is why the most noble title with which
sovereigns can honor those whose high birth or eminent worth raises them
above others is to honor them with the name and quality of Chevalier; with
all the Orders that our kings have established, the dazzling attributes of which
they themselves bear, and which they distribute to the greatest of their
realms, [they] have not any name more illustrious than that of Chevalerie.
From this one can deduce convincing evidence that the prince, the lord, and
the gentleman, like the brave soldier, counts himself greatly honored when he
is given the title and name of brave Chevalier: and nevertheless it is a
constant given that this name has its origins in that truly royal animal, the
praises and virtues of which I could not sufficiently speak with respect to its
excellence.
130
Although few scholars have looked at the role of the horse in noble culture,
those that have all underline this connection between horses, horsemanship, and
130
“[L]es plus grands Seigneurs, & les plus petits Gentilshommes, comme aussi les moindres soldats
deviennent par la force & la dexterité des chevaux, haut, puissans, braves & Illustres: c’est pourquoy
le plus beau tiltre dont les Souverains puissent honorer ceux, que la grande naissance ou l’eminente
valeur relevent par dessus les autres, est de les honorer du nom & qualité de Chevaliers, avec tous les
Ordres que nos Roys ont instituez, des marques éclatantes, desquelles ils portent eux-mesmes l’Ordre,
& qu’ils distribuent aux plus grands de leurs Royaumes, n’ont point de nom plus illustre que celuy de
Chevalerie: De là on peut tirer une preuve convainquante que le Prince, le Seigneur, & le
Gentilhomme, comme le brave Soldat, s’estime tres-honoré lors que l’on luy donne le tiltre & le nom
de brave Chevalier: & toutefois il est tres-constant que ce nom prend son origine de cét animal
vrayement Royal, des Loüanges & des vertus duquel ie ne pourrois assez suffisamment parler au
respect de son excellence.” Delcampe, separately paginated “De l’Excellence de l’art de monter à
cheval,” 19-20, in L’Art de monter à cheval (immediately following the table of contents and
preceding the main text); see also “De l’Excellence,” 1-2, 5-7, where Delcampe makes numerous
references to the nobility of the art of horsemanship. Menou, after devoting nearly three pages to
describing the nobility of the horse itself, including examples of horses from antiquity forward who
performed acts of great valor and distinction in the service of various kings and princes, has a passage
very similar to Delcampe’s regarding the links between cheval, chevalier, and chevalerie. Menou,
unpaginated preface, Pratique du cavalier (immediately following the “Epistre au Roy” and preceding
the “Privilege du Roy”).
101
noble status. Lucien Clare, author of the definitive scholarly treatment of mounted
games in the early modern period, makes frequent reference to this relationship; in
his conclusion, he sums up concisely: “Social supremacy … is attached to those who
own and know how to ride a horse.”
131
Karen Raber, who has done extensive work
on the mid-seventeenth-century equestrian treatises of William Cavendish, Duke of
Newcastle, references the connection between horses and the aristocratic attributes of
wealth and leisure:
The intellectual, emotional, and financial relationship between man and horse
was … the site of important ideological work. The amount of money, time,
and effort expended on a horse was, for instance, a significant indicator of
class difference: the cost of daily feed for one horse exceeded the daily
income of the average laborer. The quality of a horse spoke volumes about
the distinction and taste of its owner, and its maintenance for … pleasure
riding made it a sign of surplus income invested in ostentatious
consumption.
132
Helen Watanabe-O’Kelly has written numerous books and articles on early modern
forms of mounted spectacle such as the ballet à cheval and the carrousel. She
succinctly articulates the relationship between horsemanship and noble identity,
using an analogy similar to Delcampe’s:
The terms “chevalier,” “cavaliere,” “caballero,” “Ritter” all remind us that
the definition of a gentleman or nobleman was, first of all, one who could
afford to own a horse and second, one who knew how to ride it. Riding,
therefore, is more than a means of transport in peace and war, more even than
a recreation or sport, it is to do with status, with image …, with class, with
self-definition.
133
131
“[L]a suprématie sociale … s’attache à celui qui possède et sait manier un cheval.” Clare,
Quintaine, course de bague, jeu des têtes, 166.
132
Karen Raber, “Reasonable Creatures: William Cavendish and the Art of Dressage,” in Renaissance
Culture and the Everyday, ed. Patricia Fumerton and Simon Hunt (Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press, 1999), 42; see also 46, 54. Raber notes that Cavendish constantly draws
connections between horsemanship, display, birthright, and class superiority.
133
Watanabe-O’Kelly, “New Horses and New Horsemanship,” 84.
102
By highlighting the etymological links between the horse and knighthood—
cheval, chevalier, chevalerie—Watanabe-O’Kelly, Delcampe, and Menou also
allude to the longstanding connection between horses and heavy cavalry service.
Speaking of the martial education of the early modern French nobility, Albert
Babeau reiterates and expands on this etymological connection between horses,
noble status, and military service:
The horse is, so to speak, a moving pedestal for the gentleman, and the
premier noble titles and army ranks derive from this animal that is itself
considered to be noble: knights [chevaliers], equerries, constables, and
marshals all take their names from the horse and the care that is given to this
useful and sometimes superb auxiliary of the warrior.
134
In the collective mentality of the nobility, horses were linked inextricably to
military service, which in turn was linked inextricably to the display of virtue, which
in turn was linked inextricably to noble status itself. By extension, almost any
mounted activity had at least the potential to serve as a means for a nobleman to
demonstrate his virtue and thus to reaffirm his nobility, whether that activity took
place in a strictly military context or not. After all, by the late sixteenth century, the
nobility already had a long tradition of practicing its military skills and displaying its
vertu in mounted activities such as tournaments and jousts. By that time, these
activities long since had ceased to serve primarily as a means of honing potential
battle skills and had become far more a means to demonstrate dexterity in front of
134
“Le cheval, c’est, pour ainsi dire, le piédestal mouvant du gentilhomme, et les premiers titres de la
noblesse et de l’armée dérivent de cet animal qu’on a lui-même qualifié de noble; chevaliers, écuyers,
connétables et maréchaux tirent leur nom du cheval et des soins qu’on donnait à cet utile et parfois
superbe auxiliaire du guerrier.” Albert Babeau, Les Officiers, vol. 2 of La Vie militaire sous l’Ancien
Régime, 2
nd
ed. (Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1890), 5.
103
one’s peers. The concept of displaying supposedly “martial” virtues in mounted
contexts that were only distantly related to actual combat horsemanship thus already
was well established long before the nobles began to experience any serious decline
in opportunities to serve as heavy cavalrymen.
135
Once that decline began to have a serious impact on the nobility’s
opportunities to display vertu in its traditional context, mounted activities that
offered alternative means for the demonstration of the more military-specific aspects
of virtue became increasingly popular. For example, detailed descriptions and
instructions in the manuals of horsemanship used for this study indicate that, during
the late sixteenth century, a variety of mounted games had experienced a significant
surge in favor.
136
The games enjoyed this increase in popularity at least in part
135
The history of the tournament is complex and falls outside the parameters of this study. There are
a number of good general surveys of the material; see, for example, Richard Barber and Juliet Barker,
Tournaments: Jousts, Chivalry, and Pageants in the Middle Ages (Woodbridge, UK: Boydell, 1989);
Helmut Nickel, “The Tournament: An Historical Sketch,” in The Study of Chivalry: Resources and
Approaches, ed. Howell Chickering and Thomas H. Seiler (Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute
Publications [at] Western Michigan University, 1988). Specifically on the tournament in France, see
Michel Parisse, “Le Tournoi en France, des origines à la fin du XIII
e
siècle,” in Das Ritterliche
Turnier im Mittelalter: Beiträge zu einer vergleichende Formen- und Verhaltensgeschichte des
Rittertums, ed. Josef Fleckenstein (Göttingen, Germany: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1985); Philippe
Contamine, “Les Tournois en France à la fin du moyen âge,” in Ritterliche Turnier im Mittelalter. On
mounted tournament techniques, see Carroll Gillmor, “Practical Chivalry: The Training of Horses for
Tournaments and Warfare,” in Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History, ed. J. A. S. Evans and R.
W. Unger, ser. 2, vol. 13 (New York: AMS, 1992); Sydney Anglo, “How to Win at Tournaments: The
Technique of Chivalric Combat,” Antiquaries Journal 68 (1988): 248-264. All these scholars
acknowledge that, although the tournament began as an outgrowth of heavy cavalry service, over time
it evolved into a venue that served increasingly as a means to demonstrate mounted prowess before an
audience.
136
La Noue, Pluvinel, and Menou discuss all four of the popular games of the period: running at the
ring, running at the quintain, tilting, and mounted swordplay. Delcampe covers running at both the
ring and the quintain and mentions tilting solely to say that—at least by 1664—it no longer is
practiced, while La Broue touches only briefly on running at the ring and mounted swordplay. See La
Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:123-126, 2:49-50; P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 145-
157; Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 146-183; Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 159-195; Delcampe, Art de
monter à cheval, 197-234.
104
because they were suited so ideally as vehicles for the relocation of both military
prowess and martial virtue. As an outgrowth of medieval tournament sports, the
games had undeniable (albeit somewhat distant) roots in actual military practice, so
they allowed those who participated in them to maintain at least the illusion that they
were practicing potentially useful military skills, and the authors of the manuals
make it clear that the horseman will need to call on many of the qualities comprising
traditional martial vertu in order to enjoy success in these activities. At the same
time, the descriptions in these texts reveal that the games were incredibly stylized,
and the authors make it equally clear that a successful performance also required
qualities such as grace and sprezzatura—attributes that would be far more relevant in
a courtly environment than in a military one.
137
137
As already indicated, the definitive secondary source on the mounted games is Clare’s Quintaine,
course de bague, jeu des têtes; the sections most relevant to the French case are on 11-22, 37-50, 69-
97, and 165-167. Clare is especially useful on the increasingly ludic aspects of the games, frequently
mentioning that whatever pragmatic military purpose the games initially may have served ceded place
over time to purposes of display and divertissement before an admiring audience: in addition to skill
and dexterity, qualities such as grace and elegance, ease and effortlessness, style and subtlety—
basically the right “look” or appearance (le paraître)—became progressively more important. He
does, however, acknowledge that running at the quintain, at least, did develop the strength of both
horse and rider (because of the shock of hitting the quintain with the lance) as well as skill, dexterity,
and accurate aim with a lance, at least some of which would have been useful on a contemporary
battlefield (Quintaine, course de bague, jeu des têtes, 91). More generally on the various types of
mounted “theater” that were popular during the early modern period (e.g., mounted games, horse
ballets, carrousels, etc.), both in France and in Europe more broadly, the work of Helen Watanabe-
O’Kelly is particularly useful; see her “The Equestrian Ballet in Seventeenth-Century Europe: Origin,
Description, Development,” German Life & Letters 36 (1983): 198-212; “Tournaments and Their
Relevance for Warfare in the Early Modern Period,” European History Quarterly 20 (1990): 451-463,
especially 454-457, 460-461; “Tournaments in Europe,” in Spectaculum Europæum: Theatre and
Spectacle in Europe (1580-1750), ed. Pierre Béhar and Helen Watanabe-O’Kelly (Wiesbaden,
Germany: Harrassowitz, 1999), especially 594-598, 603-609; “New Horses and New Horsemanship,”
especially 75-76, 80. Although Watanabe-O’Kelly readily acknowledges the display aspect of these
activities, she also notes their potential to develop skills that might be useful in a military context:
riding ability, physical strength, speed and mobility, accuracy and precision of aim, and dexterity with
lance and sword.
105
Even more importantly for the purposes of this study and its argument,
manège equitation was very much in vogue during this period. As the analysis of the
manuals will show, the intricate movements of the manège, and in particular the
dramatic and difficult airs above the ground, ultimately leant themselves even better
than the games to the relocation of vertu. This new type of horsemanship permitted
the display of virtue in a mounted context, but one that now was divorced entirely
from any formal military connotations. The manuals make it abundantly clear,
however, that manège equitation, when properly executed, also tested a nobleman’s
ability to appear naturally elegant and gracefully nonchalant as few other activities
could. It thus was particularly well suited to provide a comforting sense of
continuity while simultaneously opening up a space for change. Finally, to further
tie these activities to the new attributes of the nobility’s slowly evolving definition,
instruction in both mounted games and manège equitation and in their correct
practice—that is, simultaneously martial and sprezzata—was most readily available
at one of the noble académies. As the next chapter will show, the curriculum at
these institutions placed an enormous emphasis on equestrian activities, devoting
more time to these specific forms of horsemanship than to all the other subjects and
activities combined.
Continuity and Change
The more martial aspects of vertu were relocated from mounted contexts that
were either explicitly military (actual combat) or fairly martial (jousting and
tourneying) to mounted contexts that were either entirely nonmilitary (manège
106
equitation) or at best only pseudo-military (mounted games). The forms in which
these aspects of virtue were manifested also were modified, from purely military
horsemanship to strictly display horsemanship. Both the new forms and the new
contexts did require a horse, however, so there still was continuity within all the
apparent changes. This combination of continuity and change had several beneficial
results for the French nobles during this period when many of them believed that the
very existence of their order was under siege. Some of these benefits influenced the
nobility’s collective belief system, while others had a more concrete impact on some
of the very real challenges it was facing.
First, in terms of noble mentalité, keeping vertu on horseback allowed the
nobles to retain at least their psychological ties to a military function and thus helped
them to weather the unavoidable loss of personal heavy cavalry service as a key part
of their collective identity. These ties were maintained to a great extent by the
nobility’s participation in mounted games that allowed nobles to develop and display
both their military prowess (or at least their potential for it) and those aspects of
vertu that traditionally had been displayed best in mounted combat. Even though
true heavy cavalry service was no longer an option for the vast majority of nobles,
they still were able to learn, practice, and display the skills and personal qualities
that—at least theoretically—would be useful in that context. Second and more
importantly, taking the more martial aspects of vertu off the battlefield—a place
fewer and fewer noblemen had occasion to visit—allowed the nobility to maintain its
longstanding ties to qualities that had been fundamental to the definition of nobility
107
for centuries. Here, too, these ties were maintained at least in part through
horsemanship. In this context, manège equitation and the airs relevés played an
especially important role, because—unlike the games—they were completely free of
any lingering military overtones. The high airs in particular were an excellent
showcase for many of the qualities of vertu that previously had been displayed to
their greatest advantage only in battle but that now could be shown off in an entirely
nonmilitary environment. Third, the retention of vertu (albeit in a slightly different
guise) as a central element in the definition of nobility allowed the nobles to sustain
the comforting illusion that nothing really had changed until their gradual transition
from medieval warrior-knights to early modern courtier-aristocrats was complete.
Finally, the curriculum at the noble academies, with its heavy emphasis on
horsemanship and other military skills and subjects, further supported the belief that
virtue and military service still were valid elements in noble definition and also
fostered the illusion of continuity in the midst of transition and change.
In terms of the various threats that menaced the continued viability of the
nobility’s beliefs about the meaning of noblesse, the recuperation of vertu through
horsemanship effectively countered those threats in several ways. First, because
these new forms of horsemanship provided a substitute, nonmilitary venue for the
display of vertu, they freed it from its ties to a military function that most nobles no
longer performed. Although mounted games also were useful in this sense, manège
equitation and especially the airs above the ground were particularly effective
responses because, again, they had no formal connection to military service at all.
108
Second, this transfer of virtue from the battlefield to the manège allowed the nobles
to reaffirm and revalidate the way in which they defined virtue and to invalidate any
type of virtue not derived in some way from military prowess, thereby countering the
argument, implicit in the rise of the new bureaucratic nobility, that virtue need not be
martial to be noble. The creation of a new, nonmilitary space in which to
demonstrate virtue asserted that these qualities did not necessarily need to be
displayed on a battlefield in order to be considered fully noble, but it also reiterated
that vertu still had to consist of the qualities that the traditional nobles continued to
insist were the only legitimate ones. Third, the relocation of virtue provided the
nobles with a new means to manifest these qualities, thus trumping their detractors’
insistence that virtue had to be personally and actively demonstrated in order to be
validly noble.
In addition to helping the nobility to refashion the roles of military service
and virtue within the definition of noblesse, horsemanship also provided an excellent
means for incorporating many of the new attributes of nobility into that definition.
Because both manège equitation and mounted games were key components of the
curriculum at the noble academies, horsemanship was tied to the new attributes of
education and “culture.” Even more importantly, both mounted games and manège
equitation offered an almost unparalleled platform for noblemen to display the
increasingly important qualities of grace and sprezzatura. Although grace and
effortlessness also could be (and were) pursued through other activities such as
fencing, dancing, and witty conversation, horsemanship was considered particularly
109
conducive to its development. After all, if a nobleman could learn to be
nonchalantly graceful while mounted on an impetuous beast that might at any
moment attempt to fling him to the ground for no apparent reason, then how much
easier would it not be for him to display the same grace and sprezzatura when
brandishing a rapier, partnering a lady in the minuet, or merely conducting a
conversation with one of his peers?
The mounted display of the qualities associated with noblesse provides the
common link between heavy cavalry service and tournament sports going into the
period under discussion and manège equitation and mounted games coming out of it.
Cavalry action and tournaments long had served as vehicles for the display of the old
attributes of nobility, while manège equitation and the mounted games related to it
served as vehicles for the display of both new and old attributes of nobility. The
capacity of horsemanship to allow for change while simultaneously providing
continuity was perhaps its most valuable contribution to the traditional French
nobility’s transition from its old belief system to its new one. By opening up a space
for change within a comfortingly familiar context, horsemanship helped make it
possible for the nobles to adapt and evolve in ways that did not require a complete
break with their traditional ideas yet still allowed them to respond to the pressures of
their changing environment. The new form of horsemanship thus served as a
“bridge” between the old and the new: from the destrier of the medieval battlefield
to the equine danseur of the early modern manège, and from the bold and brave
110
military practice of the medieval knight to the graceful and sprezzata courtly
spectacle of the early modern gentleman.
111
PART 2: THE EQUESTRIAN CONTEXT
In order to comprehend how and why manège equitation became a key factor
in the refashioning of the traditional French nobility’s self-perception and definition,
it is important to know the context in which French nobles initially became involved
in this type of horsemanship. A brief description of manège equitation’s early
history in Italy will illuminate the reasons for which its primary locus shifted from
Italy to France and how and why it became a central component in the new noble
educational system, which itself played a key role in the reconfiguration of French
noble identity. Chapter Three will cover these aspects of the larger context.
It also is important to understand the background of the men who taught
manège horsemanship to the French nobility and who wrote treatises about it in order
to understand how and why all these factors—the men, their texts, and the type of
riding they taught and wrote about—both reflected shifting contemporary notions
about early modern French noble identity and simultaneously helped to shape those
notions. To that end, Chapter Four discusses the authors and their texts. Chapter
Five, which defines the various manège movements, completes the contextual
framework, both general and equestrian-specific, for this study. Once that
framework is in place, it will be much easier to see the contribution of manège
equitation and the airs above the ground to the nobility’s gradual transition from a
definition that revolved around the qualities of an ideal medieval knight to one that
revolved around those of an ideal early modern courtier.
112
CHAPTER 3
The History of Manège Equitation in France
The Italian Precursors
Much like the new courtly ideal, the new form of horsemanship flourished
first in Renaissance Italy.
138
There is ample proof that manège equitation was
commonly taught and practiced in various parts of Italy, apparently by the 1530s and
certainly by the 1550s. The latter date is conclusively supported by the appearance
of multiple texts on the topic written by Italian horsemen, beginning in 1550 with Gli
Ordini di cavalcare by Federico Grisone. Two other key figures from this early
period are Gianbattista Pignatelli and Cesare Fiaschi. Pignatelli left no published
work, while Fiaschi authored the 1556 Trattato dell’imbrigliare, maneggiare, et
ferrare cavalli.
139
Data on all three of these men are available primarily through
equestrian “histories” written for general rather than scholarly audiences, which
rarely refer to any primary sources. The following thus represents the received
version of the lives, works, and influence of these early Italian masters. These
details are offered solely to establish the general timing of the rise of manège
138
The earliest origins of manège equitation are still the topic of some debate and, given the dearth of
source materials, may never be definitively known. It is possible that this type of horsemanship has
earlier roots somewhere in the Iberian peninsula, but that hypothesis has yet to be proven.
139
Federico Grisone, Gli Ordini de cavalcare & modi di conoscere le nature de’ cavalli … (Naples:
Giovan Paolo Suganappo, 1550); Cesare Fiaschi, Trattato dell’imbrigliare, maneggiare, et ferrare
cavalli … (Bologna: Anselmo Giaccarelli, 1556). Other important early Italian treatises of
horsemanship include Claudio Corte, Il Cavallarizzo … nel qual si tratta della natura de’ cavalli, del
modo de domarli, & frenarli … (Venice: Giordano Ziletti, 1562); Pasqual Caracciolo, La Gloria del
cavallo … (Venice: Gabriel Giolito de’ Ferrari, 1566). Publication information in all cases is for the
first edition of the given text.
113
equitation, its popularity among the European nobility in general, and its impact on
the French nobility in particular.
Federico Grisone always is described in the secondary literature as a key
figure because his methods were the first to make it into print. Gli Ordini di
cavalcare was enormously successful throughout Europe and remained influential
for nearly a century following its initial publication. The book went through
multiple Italian editions in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, and it
was translated into numerous other languages very soon after its first appearance in
1550, each of them also running into multiple editions and often additional
translations.
140
It is generally accepted that Grisone had a substantial impact through his
teaching as well as through his book, but the secondary literature varies so much
140
The first French translation of Gli Ordini di cavalcare was done in 1559, and multiple editions
followed. The number and variety of translations and editions of this text are well documented in the
bibliographical literature; see, for example, the material on Grisone and his treatise in Frederick H.
Huth, Works on Horses and Equitation: A Bibliographical Record of Hippology (London: Bernard
Quaritch, 1887); Gabriel René Mennessier de la Lance, Essai de bibliographie hippique, 2 vols. and
supplement (Paris: Lucien Dorbon, 1915-1917 and 1921); Ellen B. Wells, Horsemanship: A
Bibliography of Printed Materials from the Sixteenth Century through 1974 (New York: Garland,
1985). There also are a number of hippobibliographies specific to a given collection, which may or
may not include a certain title; see, for example, Claire Gilbride Fox, The Fairman Rogers Collection
on the Horse and Equitation: A History and Guide (Philadelphia: Medical Documentation Service of
the College of Physicians of Philadelphia for the School of Veterinary Medicine at the University of
Pennsylvania, 1975); Thomas E. Marston, “Books on Horses,” Yale University Library Gazette 39
(1965): 105-136; Elisabeth Niemyer, The Reign of the Horse: The Horse in Print, 1500-1715; An
Exhibition at the Folger Shakespeare Library …, with introduction by Anthony Dent (Washington,
DC: Folger Library Publications, 1991); John B. Podeschi, comp., Books on the Horse and
Horsemanship: Riding, Hunting, Breeding and Racing, 1400-1941, vol. 4 of Sport in Art and Books:
The Paul Mellon Collection (London: Tate Gallery for the Yale Center of British Art, 1981); Richard
Baron von Hünersdorff, Horsemanship 1528-1985: Five Centuries of Equestrian Thought in Print; a
Catalogue of the Outstanding Library Formed by Ludwig Baron von Hünersdorff … (Wickmere, UK:
Merrion, n.d. [between 1985 and 1995]).
114
regarding whom he actually taught that it is difficult to know with any certainty.
141
In terms of the timing of his influence, numerous sources state that Grisone founded
a riding academy in Naples, and several of them stipulate 1532 as the date of its
foundation.
142
Grisone’s precise dates are unknown, but two twentieth-century
authors put his death at 1570.
143
Given the available evidence, it is not possible to connect Grisone directly to
the development of manège equitation in France. On the other hand, he was both the
author of the first, very widely read treatise on the topic and a founding member of
what modern authors call “the School of Naples,” which was the archetype from
which all subsequent national “schools” were derived. Simply by virtue of his status
in the broader European history of this type of horsemanship, Grisone had an impact
on the development of manège equitation in France.
Like Grisone, Cesare Fiaschi had a considerable impact on European
horsemanship through his treatise on manège equitation. His 1556 Trattato
141
For example, Watanabe-O’Kelly, “Tournaments in Europe,” 597, has him teaching Fiaschi, while
Hilda Nelson, “Antoine de Pluvinel: Classical Horseman and Humanist,” introduction to Le Maneige
royal [1623], by Antoine de Pluvinel, trans. Hilda Nelson (London: J. A. Allen, 1989), ix, has him
teaching Pignatelli. Neither author (both legitimate literary scholars) offers a source for these
supposed facts, and they are directly contradicted by other sources: von Hünersdorff, Horsemanship
1528-1985, s.v. Fiaschi, Cesare, entry no. 68, says Fiaschi taught Grisone; Max Gahwyler, “The
Legacy of the Masters,” The National Sporting Library Newsletter 46 (1996), 6, says Pignatelli taught
Grisone. Neither of these writers cites a source either.
142
Those who give the date include von Hünersdorff, Horsemanship 1528-1985, s.v. Grisone,
Federico, entry no. 87; Watanabe-O’Kelly, “New Horses and New Horsemanship,” 73; Watanabe-
O’Kelly, “Tournaments in Europe,” 596; Alexander Mackay-Smith, “Riding in the Renaissance and
in the Baroque Period,” in The Royal Horse and Rider: Painting, Sculpture, and Horsemanship, 1500-
1800, by Walter Liedtke (New York: Abaris, 1989), 90. None of these authors cites a source for the
date. Those who merely mention Grisone as the founder of the school include Gahwyler, “Legacy of
the Masters,” 6; Valdimir S. Littauer, The Development of Modern Riding: The Story of Formal
Riding from Renaissance Times to the Present (New York: Howell, 1962), 38; André Monteilhet, Les
Maîtres de l’œuvre équestre (Paris: Odège, 1979), 137.
143
Gahwyler, “Legacy of the Masters,” 6; Etienne Saurel, Histoire de l’équitation, des origines à nos
jours (Paris: Stock, 1971), 208. Neither cites a source for this date.
115
dell’imbrigliare, maneggiare, et ferrare cavalli enjoyed tremendous success, going
through multiple editions and translations throughout the remainder of the sixteenth
century and well into the seventeenth.
144
The timing of his influence as an instructor
also is similar to Grisone’s. Numerous sources maintain that Fiaschi founded an
academy in Ferrara in or around 1534, and several of them also say that Fiaschi’s
academy flourished from that date until around 1580.
145
Only two modern authors
offer any dates for his birth or death, and they disagree; what little evidence there is
suggests that he was nearing the end of his life by 1580.
146
Fiaschi’s biggest contribution to the history of manège equitation, however,
remains his impact as an instructor. Numerous sources state that he was responsible
for training the third seminal figure in the early history of manège equitation, the
Neapolitan horseman Gianbattista Pignatelli.
147
At least in part because he left no
published work, little is known of Pignatelli. The dates of his birth and death are
144
Editions and translations are well documented in the bibliographical literature; see n. 140, above,
for references. The first French translation of Fiaschi’s treatise was done in 1564, and numerous other
editions followed.
145
Sources that cite both dates include Monteilhet, Maîtres de l’œuvre équestre, 119; von
Hünersdorff, Horsemanship 1528-1985, s.v. Fiaschi, Cesare, entry no. 68; Watanabe-O’Kelly, “New
Horses and New Horsemanship,” 75. Saurel, Histoire de l’équitation, 208, says Fiaschi’s academy
opened in Ferrara in 1534; Littauer, Development of Modern Riding, 38, and Schalk, Valor to
Pedigree, 185, agree that Fiaschi founded a school in Ferrara but give no precise dates. Here again,
no source is cited by any of these individuals.
146
Monteilhet, Maîtres de l’œuvre équestre, 119, suggests that Fiaschi either had died or had simply
ceased to teach by 1580. Saurel first posits that Fiaschi died ca. 1575 (Histoire de l’équitation, 209)
and then offers dates for his life of 1523 to 1592 (Histoire de l’équitation, 212).
147
Littauer, Development of Modern Riding, 38; Mackay-Smith, “Riding in the Renaissance and
Baroque,” 89; Monteilhet, Maîtres de l’œuvre équestre, 119, 222; Saurel, Histoire de l’équitation,
208, 213; Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 185; Watanabe-O’Kelly, “New Horses and New Horsemanship,”
75; Watanabe-O’Kelly, “Tournaments in Europe,” 597. No source is cited by anyone.
116
uncertain, although the available evidence suggests that he died in the late 1590s.
148
Like Grisone, Pignatelli had a broad impact on European horsemanship through his
standing as a founding member of the School of Naples.
Unlike Grisone and Fiaschi, Pignatelli’s impact on the history of manège
equitation specifically in France is well documented. His students included Salomon
de la Broue and Antoine de Pluvinel, both of whose manuals are used in this study.
In their texts, these horsemen clearly state that they studied at Pignatelli’s academy
and that what they learned from him played a role in their own subsequent theories
and methods.
149
In the late sixteenth century, La Broue and Pluvinel launched what
ultimately would become “the French School” or—as it is called more commonly
though less accurately during the lifetime of these two seminal figures—“the School
of Versailles.” Pignatelli—and by extension, his own teacher, Fiaschi—thus had a
direct impact on the development of manège equitation in France.
148
Monteilhet, Maîtres de l’œuvre équestre, 223, says that Pignatelli “must have been born around
1525 and died before the end of the century,” but he cites no source for his dates. François de
Bassompierre actually studied with Pignatelli; in his Mémoires du maréchal de Bassompierre [1665],
ed. Audoin de la Cropte de Chantérac, vol. 1 (Paris: Renouard, 1870), 49, he says that, by either 1597
or 1599, the instructor was so elderly that it was affecting his teaching, but the syntax and punctuation
make it difficult to determine which date is correct. J. R. Hale, “The Military Education of the Officer
Class in Early Modern Europe,” in Renaissance War Studies (London: Hambledon, 1983), 235, says
that Pignatelli died in 1596, but the phrasing of the related endnote makes his source for that date
unclear.
149
La Broue says that, “sur tous les plus dignes maistres que i’ay cogneus, ie donne la supprême
loüange au seigneur Iean Baptiste Pignatel …” (Cavalerice françois, 2:5). He then goes on to say that
the goal of his second book is in fact to present the methods of Pignatelli and his nephew, “le seigneur
Horace de la Mare,” as well as his own ideas: “Ie veux faire paroistre en ce Second Livre, leur belle
& artificielle curiosité à tous les hommes de cheval de ce temps, & à l’advenir aux successeurs de nos
escoles: & usant de ma franchise & liberalité naturelle, ie ioindray aux enseignemens de ces deux …
les observations, que mes longues peines ont fait naistre, en mon peu d’entendement” (Cavalerice
françois, 2:7). Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 30, speaks of “Seigneur Iean Baptiste Pignatel
Gentilhomme Neapolitain, le plus excellent homme de cheval qui ait iamais esté de nostre siecle, ny
auparavant, duquel i’ay appris une partie de ce que sçay durant le temps de six annees que i’ay
passees aupres de luy.”
117
Until the French School was established, however, the Italian academies were
still the destination of choice. During the second half of the sixteenth century,
nobles from all over Europe went to Italy to learn the new riding style.
150
We
already have seen that La Broue and Pluvinel numbered among the French noblemen
who studied there, and François de Bassompierre also discusses the time that he and
his brother spent studying horsemanship in the mid-1590s with several instructors in
Naples and Florence.
151
As J. R. Hale points out, had the brothers Bassompierre
delayed their departure for a few short years, they could have avoided the trip
altogether, since Pluvinel opened the first French académie in Paris in 1594.
152
The French Académies
Much of the available evidence of the attendance of French nobles at Italian
riding academies during the second half of the sixteenth century is in response to the
development of a domestic alternative: the authors often are celebrating the fact that
150
Hale, “Military Education,” 234; Monteilhet, Maîtres de l’œuvre équestre, 137; Nordhaus, “Arma
et Litterae,” 120-121, 220; Saurel, Histoire de l’équitation, 208-209.
151
Bassompierre, Mémoires, 49, speaks of working with Picardini and Terenant in Florence and with
Pignatelli and Mirabello in Naples.
152
Hale, “Military Education,” 236. Numerous contemporary sources confirm both the date of
Pluvinel’s academy and its status as the first of its kind. For the date, see Henri IV’s brevet, dated 17
January 1594, substantially increasing Pluvinel’s pension in support of his endeavors (Bibliothèque
Nationale Fonds Fr. 28790); the document is reproduced in its entirety in Hubert de Terrebasse,
Antoine de Pluvinel, dauphinois, 1552-1620 (Lyon: L. Brun, 1911), 13-14. The primary purpose of
Alexandre de Pontaymery’s treatise, L’Academie, ou Institution de la noblesse françoise (Paris: Jamet
Mettayer & Pierre L’Huillier, 1595; reprinted in Oeuvres, Paris: Jean Richer, 1599; page references
are to 1599 ed.), was to laud Pluvinel’s establishment and to inform his readers of its existence, so the
school clearly was functioning by 1595. Regarding Pluvinel’s school as the first of its kind, in 1604
Pelletier notes that Pluvinel’s school represents “le premier plan de l’Académie,” and around 1650
Sauval states that Pluvinel “est le premier qui ait tenu un Manege à Paris”; see Pelletier, La
Nourriture de la noblesse … (Paris: Patisson, 1604), 96, cited by Lucien Hoche, “Pluvinel et les
académies,” app. 23 in Contribution à l’histoire de Paris: Paris occidental, XII
e
siècle-XIX
e
siècle
(Paris: Henri Leclerc, 1912), 883; Henri Sauval, Histoire et recherches des antiquités de la ville de
Paris [ca. 1650], 3 vols. (Paris: Charles Moette, and Paris: Jacques Chardon, both 1724; reprint,
Westmead, UK: Gregg International, 1969; page references are to 1969 ed.), 2:498 (hereafter cited as
Histoire de Paris).
118
the French nobility no longer is obligated to go to Italy to obtain instruction in
horsemanship and the other “exercices” typically sought there, because schools such
as Pluvinel’s have made that instruction available to them within the borders of their
own realm.
153
One of the few sources that predates the establishment of the first
académie in 1594 is La Broue’s manual of horsemanship, the first edition of which
appeared that same year. In several places in his text, La Broue laments the fact that
the French nobility is spending so much money going to Italy to learn to ride, thus
confirming that this was a fairly common practice at the time.
154
Among those
writing after 1594, Alexandre de Pontaymery rejoices in 1595 that the establishment
of domestic academies alleviates the need for French nobles to run off to Italy: “We
now can forget this path and learn the airs at the academy of the sieur de
Pluvinel….”
155
Pietro Duodo, the Venetian ambassador to the court of Henri IV
(1589-1610), remarks in 1598 on the establishment and popularity of the new French
academies, both in Paris and the provinces, and laments the impact that this is likely
153
Contemporary sources on noble education, at both French and Italian academies, frequently use the
term “exercices” specifically in the plural to describe the various physical activities one could learn at
these establishment; this definition is confirmed by DAF, s.v. “exercices,” which actually gives as one
of its usage examples: “On l’a mis à l’Académie pour faire ses exercices.”
154
“[T]ant de ieunesse Françoise s’achemine avec beaucoup de frais en Italie pour apprendre à monter
à cheval …”; “Si l’on veut considerer les finances, que depuis trente ans en çà, la Noblesse Françoise,
à [sic] transporté en Italie, la pluspart expressement pour s’exercer à cheval, l’on s’estonnera qu’il en
soit revenu si peu d’excellens en cest art …”; “[B]eaucoup de Noblesse Françoyse, a esté en Italie,
pour s’exercer à cheval….” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:2, 2:166-167, 2:170, respectively.
Although the second edition of 1602-1608 is cited here, it is likely for two reasons that these
particular sections of text remained unchanged from the first edition of 1593-1594: first, because La
Broue makes no mention of Pluvinel’s academy in these passages, and his comments make no sense if
they were written after that establishment—not to mention the many others modeled on it—had been
in business for some ten years; and second, because La Broue’s reference to the past thirty years
makes far more sense if it were written in the early 1590s than if it were written during the first
decade of the seventeenth century.
155
“[Pluvinel] nous desrobe l’occasion de courir en Italie …”; “Nous pouvons maintenant oublier ce
chemin, & prendre les erres de l’Academie du Sieur de Pluvinel….” Pontaymery, L’Academie, 2
r
, 3
r
,
respectively.
119
to have on his native country: “If this continues, it is to be believed that we will see
far fewer young Frenchmen in Italy, and that the city of Padua in particular will
suffer as a result.”
156
Several others comment in a similar fashion, noting that
French nobles used to have to go to Italy to learn what they now can access at one of
the domestic académies, again confirming that a stint in Italy was de rigueur among
late sixteenth-century French noblemen who could afford it.
157
Once Pluvinel’s flagship academy was established in Paris, however,
studying at home rather than abroad rapidly became the more popular choice for the
young nobleman wishing to “faire ses exercices.” Other schools, often modeled on
Pluvinel’s, quickly appeared both in Paris and in the provinces.
158
We know from
156
“Sa Majesté … a fondé une académie à Paris…. A l’exemple de cette académie, d’autres se sont
établies dans différentes villes du royaume, à Rouen, à Toulouse. Si cela continue, il est à croire que
l’on verra beaucoup moins de jeunes Français en Italie, et que notamment la ville de Padoue en
souffrira.” Pietro Duodo, “Relazione di Francia,” in Le Relazioni degli ambasciatori veneti al Senato,
ed. E. Albèri, vol. 15 (Florence, 1863), 103, cited by Hoche, “Pluvinel et les académies,” 882-883.
The translation from the original Italian presumably is Hoche’s, although he does not say so.
157
See, for example, the following quotes from 1604, 1610, 1612, and ca. 1650, respectively: “La
France ne cède maintenant à l’Italie pour bien eslever notre noblesse à tous les exercices….”
Pelletier, Nourriture de la noblesse, 96, cited by Hoche, “Pluvinel et les académies,” 883. “Il n’est
plus besoin à la Noblesse françoyse d’aller à grans frais en Italie….” Baltazar Prévost, sieur de la
Tricherie, Le Cavesson françoys … (Poiters: Charles Pignon & Catherine Courtois, 1610), no page
number given, cited by Mennessier, Bibliographie hippique, s.v. Pont-Aimery, Alexandre. “[A]u lieu
que nous allions chercher cét Art en Italie, nous le trouvons aujourd’huy en France….” Menou,
preface, Pratique du cavalier. “Avant Pluvinel, il falloit que la Noblesse allât en Italie pour apprendre
à monter à Cheval.” Sauval, Histoire de Paris, 2:498. Although the 1650 edition of Menou’s book is
cited here, this particular section of text appears to have remained unchanged from the first edition of
1612: the surrounding prose refers to Pluvinel in the present tense, and Pluvinel died in 1620.
158
Secondary source materials on the French académies are limited. A fairly comprehensive selection
of the available literature in French and English, in reverse chronological order, includes: Motley,
“The Academy,” chap. 3 in Becoming a French Aristocrat (1990); Schalk, “Education, the
Academies, and the Emergence of the New Image of the Cultured Noble-Aristocrat,” chap. 8 in Valor
to Pedigree (1986); Commandant de la Roche [no first name given], “Les Académies militaires sous
l’Ancien Régime, d’après des documents inédits,” Revue des Etudes Historiques (1929): 409-418;
Maurice Dumolin, “Les Académies parisiennes d’équitation,” pts. 1-3, Bulletin de la Société
Archéologique, Historique et Artistique le Vieux Papier 111 (1925): 417-428, 112 (1925): 485-494,
113 (1926): 556-572; Hoche, “Pluvinel et les académies,” app. 23 in Contribution à l’histoire de
Paris (1912); Albert Folly, “Les Académies d’armes (XVI
e
et XVII
e
siècles),” Bulletin de la Société
120
Duodo’s report to the Venetian Senate that academies existed in Rouen and Toulouse
by 1598.
159
Pelletier’s comments about the academy opened in Paris by Benjamin, a
pupil of Pluvinel’s, indicate that that establishment already was operating when
Pelletier’s book was published in 1604.
160
A number of scholars note the academy
opened in Aix-en-Provence in 1611, a fact supported by archival evidence.
161
Several historians have plumbed the limited archival material available on
these early institutions, and they all lament the dearth of information on schools
established prior to around 1670, after which the sources become somewhat richer.
Schalk tells us that a search of the relevant archives for information on academies
founded in the first half of the century turned up only a single example: an academy
du VI
e
Arrondissement de Paris 2 (1899): 162-171; Babeau, “Les Académies,” chap. 4 in Les
Officiers (1890); see also Nordhaus, “Arma et Litterae,” 118-121, 220-226; Terrebasse, Pluvinel, 5-6,
13-15, 19, 24. These noble académies are not to be confused with the literary, artistic, or scientific
académies, such as the Académie Française, that also were founded in France from the late sixteenth
through the eighteenth centuries but for entirely different purposes.
159
Duodo, “Relazione di Francia,” 103, cited by Hoche, “Pluvinel et les académies,” 882-883; see n.
156, above, for the full quote. Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 182 n. 18, also cites Archives Nationales
(hereafter cited as A.N.) O
1
917, fol. 208, as confirming that an academy was founded in Toulouse in
1598.
160
“[L]’Académie que le sieur [de] Pluvinel dressa à Paris … a si bien servy de modèle aux autres
qu’à son imitation cette eschole est encore aujourd’hui ouverte par le sieur de Benjamin….” Pelletier,
Nourriture de la noblesse, 96, cited by Hoche, “Pluvinel et les académies,” 883. Schalk, Valor to
Pedigree, 184, also cites Pelletier as evidence that Benjamin’s school must been established prior to
1604. Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” pt. 1, 422 n. 6, notes that Quesnel’s 1609 map of Paris
confirms the existence of Benjamin’s academy by that date.
161
Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 188, cites A.N. O
1
915, fols. 181-201, as containing some detailed
records for the academy founded at Aix-en-Provence in 1611, including the King’s letter (fol. 181)
establishing the academy and stipulating that it should follow the model of the Parisian schools.
Elsewhere, Schalk identifies fol. 183 of the same collection for the curriculum to be employed at this
school; see Ellery Schalk, “Pluvinel, le renouvellement de la noblesse et les prémices de l’Ecole de
Versailles,” in Les Ecuries royales du XVI
e
au XVIII
e
siècle, ed. Daniel Reytier (Paris: Association
pour l’Académie d’Art Equestre de Versailles, 1998), 171. Others who cite A.N. O
1
915 for the
academy at Aix include Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” pt. 1, 423; Hoche, “Pluvinel et les
académies,” 412; Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 136 n. 30, 139, 157 n. 75, 160. Scholars
who mention that this school was established in 1611 without citing the archival evidence include
Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 262; Bohanan, Nobility in Aix, 126.
121
was founded at Riom in 1644.
162
Maurice Dumolin says that archival information is
so scarce for the period prior to 1670 that researchers are forced to fall back on
contemporary guides and maps; he notes that Gomboust’s map of Paris in 1647
shows six academies in existence at that time.
163
Mark Motley offers the following
partial explanation for this lack of archival material on the early schools:
It is difficult to be more precise about the number or chronology of these
schools during the seventeenth century, for their administrative status was
unclear until the grand écuyer, the court official with broad authority over
equestrian matters, increasingly took them under his tutelage after 1680 and
effectively imposed the obligation for a riding master to obtain letters of
provision from him.
164
Regardless of the exact trajectory, both geographic and chronological, of the
early academies, the records that exist for the later part of the seventeenth century
demonstrate that by that time they had become extremely popular and were
162
Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 191 n. 50. The archives in question are A.N. O
1
915-917 (Maison du
Roi). With the exception of Riom, all other material is for schools founded after 1670. Brockliss,
“Richelieu, Education, and the State,” 240-245, and Roger Chartier, Marie-Madeleine Compère, and
Dominique Julia, L’Education en France du XVI
e
au XVIII
e
siècle (Paris: Société d’Edition
d’Enseignement Supérieur, 1976), 183-185, both discuss academies founded by Richelieu in 1636 in
Paris and in 1640 in Richelieu; these schools were not, however, strictly analogous to the academies
inspired by Pluvinel’s.
163
Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” pt. 1, 425; he also notes that Gomboust’s map, though
engraved in 1647, was not published until 1652. Sauval, Histoire de Paris, 2:498, confirms that there
were several Parisian academies in existence ca. 1650: “Pluvinel pour donner plus d’éclat à son
institution, l’honora du nom d’Academie. Sous ce beau nom, Benjamin, Potrincourt, Nesmond &
plusieurs autres Ecuyers, ont exercé & exercent encore la même profession….” For additional details
on these and other early academy directors, see Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” pt. 1, 420-423
(for Benjamin and Potrincourt, whom he has as Poutrincourt or Poitrincourt), 426-427 (for Nesmond,
whom he also has as Mesmont).
164
Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 126-127; he continues: “The papers of the grand écuyer
reflect only officially authorized schools after 1680, and even so give an idea of how confused the
situation was during the earlier period” (Becoming a French Aristocrat, 127 n. 7). Motley is
particularly useful for the archival research that he has done and which he cites in detail, as well as for
the more obscure secondary materials he has identified for selected individual academies; see, for
example, the sources in Becoming a French Aristocrat, 127-128 nn. 8, 9, and 10.
122
proliferating rapidly.
165
Modern writers repeatedly point out that, over the course of
the seventeenth century, the reputation of the French écuyers (riding masters)
definitively surpassed that of the Italians and that, in contrast to their behavior in the
previous century, the nobles of Europe began flocking to the French schools rather
than to the Italian ones.
166
Estimates of the precise timing of this transition vary
from author to author, and many of them offer no support for their choice. Some
date the change to the period in which Pluvinel and La Broue were active, which
would put it in the early seventeenth century, but the preponderance of the available
evidence points to a slightly later date. Menou, speaking of the obligation owed to
Pluvinel by all of France, says the following in 1650:
The men who passed through his hands have established such fine schools
that, instead of going to Italy to seek out this art, we find it today in France,
more perfect even than in the country of its origin, and capable of attracting
foreigners, who would not be esteemed in their countries if they had not
passed through one of our academies.
167
Probably writing in the early 1660s, Pierre de Poix, like Menou, reminds the
French nobles of the debt they owe Pluvinel for having made it possible for them “to
165
On the apogee of the academies in the late seventeenth century, see p. 353 in the Conclusion.
166
See, for example, Babeau, Les Officiers, 31; Anthony Dent, introduction to Reign of the Horse, 22;
Littauer, Development of Modern Riding, 38; Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 134; Nelson,
“Antoine de Pluvinel,” xiii; Saurel, Histoire de l’équitation, 217, 225; Arthur Christian, L’Art
équestre à Paris: Tournois, joûtes et carrousels, académies, courses et cirques … (Paris: Roustan,
1907), 60; see also Chartier, Compère, and Julia, Education en France, 182, who offer a statistical
table of foreign attendees at the academy in Angers from 1601 to 1635: a total of 640 students
attended during the 34-year period.
167
“[L]a France luy a cette obligation, que les Hommes qui sont sortis de ses mains ont estably de si
bonnes Escholes, qu’au lieu que nous allions chercher cét Art en Italie, nous le trouvons aujourd’huy
en France plus parfait qu’au pays mesme de son origine, & capable d’attirer chez nous les Estrangers,
qui ne seroient pas estimez en leur pays, s’ils n’avoient passé par nos Academies.” Menou, preface,
Pratique du cavalier. It is assumed that in this instance Menou is writing in 1650, the date of the
revised and expanded edition of his Pratique du cavalier. When the book first appeared in 1612,
Pluvinel’s academy had been in operation for less than twenty years, which is too short a time for his
pupils’ establishments to have gained the type of international reputation of which Menou boasts here.
123
become good gendarmes without leaving their country, and to see foreigners come to
learn here in France that which we, to our shame, used to have to go to learn in their
countries.”
168
By 1684, Germain Brice could make the following statement about
Paris, which illustrates both the proliferation of the académies by that date and their
popularity with the nobility of both France and elsewhere:
There is perhaps no other city in the world where one can count six
academies as in this part of town, most of them filled with the most illustrious
youth of France and Germany, who come here to learn all the things that
render a gentleman accomplished and capable of acquiring a reputation in
society. In a single winter, there sometimes have been twelve foreign princes
and more than three hundred counts and barons, without counting an even
greater number of simple noblemen, whom the reputation of France attracted
to learn les exercices, which are not at all taught to the same degree of
perfection in their home countries.
169
The comments of Menou, Poix, and Brice reinforce the archival evidence
that, by the second half of the seventeenth century, the French académies were both
numerous and well attended. From this we may deduce that, during the first half of
the century, they were steadily growing in number and popularity. When Brice’s
168
“[O]n peut dire, à tous les gentilshommes français, qu’ils ont l’obligation à la mémoire de ce grand
homme de devenir bons gendarmes, sans sortir de leur pays, et de voir que les étrangers viennent
apprendre chez nous, ce que, à notre honte, nous allions apprendre chez eux.” Pierre de Poix,
Mémoire (ms.), cited by Terrebasse, Pluvinel, 13. Terrebasse says that Pierre de Poix (third husband
of Gabrielle de Pluvinel, daughter of Antoine) is almost certainly the author of the document
containing this passage, which Terrebasse describes as a handwritten Mémoire of “trois grandes
pages,” addressed to Nicholas Chorier “en sa qualité de procureur spécial du Roi attaché au bureau de
l’intendant Dugué, à Grenoble, lors des recherches sur la Noblesse décrétées en 1666” (Pluvinel, 2).
It is unclear from Terrebasse’s footnotes where the original manuscript is housed, but it is reproduced
in its entirety, albeit alternating with his own prose, in Terrebasse’s text (Pluvinel, 2 n. 4)
169
“Il n’est peut-être aucune ville dans le monde où l’on puisse compter six académies comme dans ce
quartier, remplies la plupart de tout ce qu’il y a d’illustre jeunesse de France et d’Allemagne, qui y
viennent [sic] apprendre toutes les choses qui rendent un gentilhomme accompli et capable d’acquérir
de la réputation dans le monde. On a quelquefois compté dans un hiver douze princes étrangers, et
plus de trois cents comtes et barons, sans un bien plus grand nombre de simples gentilshommes, que
la réputation de la France attirait pour … faire des exercices que l’on n’enseigne point chez eux dans
la même perfection.” Germain Brice, Description nouvelle de ce qu’il y a de plus remarquable dans
la ville de Paris, 2 vols. (Paris: Nicolas le Gras, 1684), 2:135, cited by Dumolin, “Académies
parisiennes,” pt. 1, 425.
124
description of the high social status of students at Parisian academies in the late
seventeenth century is coupled with the connection—explicitly articulated by Menou
and heavily implied by Brice—between a stint in a French academy and the esteem
of a nobleman’s peers, it seems reasonable to posit that many young male members
of the early seventeenth-century high nobility, and especially those who aspired to a
career at court, attended one of these schools during the earlier period.
170
For the purposes of this study’s argument, however, actual practice again is
less important than belief. Despite the fact that many court nobles probably did
spend time at one of these establishments, it was not really necessary for all or even
most members of that group to physically attend an académie in order for the group
to begin to believe that such an education was part of the noble ideal. It is only
necessary to look at the courtiers at Louis XIV’s Versailles to see that, by the end of
the seventeenth century, the cultured refinement that an academy education was
designed to produce had become an intrinsic part of the self-perception and
170
Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 161, states categorically that contemporaries viewed
attendance at an academy as “essential preparation for any ambitious noble hoping to make a career at
court and in the army.” Unless more source materials are discovered, however, it may never be
possible to establish the number of nobles who received an academy education, either before or after
1670; extant records of attendees at various academies are scarce and scattered, both geographically
and chronologically. What records do exist indicate that attendance was very costly and that many
students only stayed for a short time, and many modern scholars point out that the high cost precluded
the participation of the vast majority of nobles; see, for example, Babeau, Les Officiers, 35; Major,
Renaissance Monarchy, 332. On the actual sums involved, Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat,
135-137, explores a range of contemporary sources that deal with the costs of attending one of these
schools in Paris and the provinces in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries; see also Babeau, Les
Officiers, 35, on costs at Jouan’s Parisian academy in 1760; Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” on
those at Pluvinel’s establishment in the early seventeenth century (pt. 1, 419), at Villiers’s in 1678 (pt.
2, 493), and at Dugard’s between 1750 and 1767 (pt. 3, 562-563, 568); La Roche, “Académies
militaires,” 412, on those at the academy in Lyon in 1747.
125
definition of the court nobility. In the narrow case of the court nobles, these changes
in beliefs even resulted in changes in behaviors.
But what of the rest of the nobility—that vast majority who never attended
court or even aspired to do so? As argued in the Introduction, changes in the beliefs
of the minority—in this case the high and court nobility—did gradually spread out
from the center and down from the top. Since those at the summit of the order
tended to serve as a model for those further down the noble hierarchy, changes in the
beliefs of that minority therefore could and did lead—gradually, over time—to
changes in the beliefs of the majority. As for changes in actual behaviors, they are
far less important: just as the late medieval rural hobereau had not had to serve in
the heavy cavalry in order to believe that the qualities associated with the strong and
valiant gendarme defined the noble ideal of his period, so his early modern
equivalent did not need to attend a noble academy in order to believe that the
qualities associated with the cultured and elegant gentilhomme defined the noble
ideal of his.
During the first half of the seventeenth century, this process was still in its
nascent stages, at least as far as the noble “masses” were concerned. At the level of
the court nobility, on the other hand, an academy education not only was part of the
emerging definition of what constituted the ideal courtier-aristocrat but also was a
means of bridging the difference between the old definition and the new one. As
will be shown below, the truth of this supposition is borne out by contemporary
comments on the role and purpose of these institutions. These remarks reflect the
126
shifting beliefs of the nobility about the meaning of noblesse, as they clearly identify
the two-pronged goal of the academy curriculum: on the one hand, to reinforce the
traditional martial skills and qualities of vertu needed by the late medieval warrior-
knight and, on the other hand, to teach the new type of physical grace, sprezzatura,
and other attributes comprising the cultured refinement expected of the early modern
courtier-aristocrat.
The Académie Curriculum
The continued presence of vertu in the belief system of the late sixteenth- and
early seventeenth-century French nobility shows up clearly in the textual evidence
about the academies, as does the new belief that the academy is an excellent means
for developing it. For example, Pontaymery devotes much of his 1595 book to
extolling Pluvinel’s school for its ability to teach virtue. He begins: “Pluvinel …
has devoutly offered himself to the nobility, to serve as its ladder and stepping stone
to the most elevated and glorious things that virtue can allocate to those who seek
it….” Pontaymery says that Pluvinel has “erected a temple to virtue, for in truth he
instructs the gentilhomme not only in the profession of the manège but also in the
practice of good habits and behaviors [bonnes mœurs
171
].” Later in his text,
171
Modern scholars of early modern French noble culture frequently translate mœurs as “morals.”
While this makes sense etymologically, these scholars also frequently seem to assume that “morals”
had the same meaning in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century French usage that it does in modern
English usage, which is not necessarily true. Jean Nicot, Thresor de la langue françoyse (1606), s.vv.
“mœurs” and “moral,” http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/ efts/ARTFL/projects/dicos/TLF-NICOT/,
translates mœurs as the Latin mores and moral as “ce qui touche aux moeurs et instruction d’icelles”;
moral is derived from the Latin moralis, which is in turn derived from mores. DAF, s.vv. “mœurs”
and “moral(e)” also makes a direct connection between mœurs and moral in the sense of mores. As
an adjective, moral is defined specifically as “appartenant aux mœurs,” while the noun morale is “la
doctrine des moeurs.” Mœurs could refer to personal behavioral standards (“les habitudes naturelles
127
Pontaymery continues in the same vein: “At Pluvinel’s academy, you have so much
in use that is the very substance of virtue….” After explaining in detail his rationale
for making all of these statements, Pontaymery closes, “This is why I send you to
Pluvinel’s, as if to a school and true oracle and temple of virtue.”
172
Over the course of the next seven decades, multiple texts reconfirm both the
continued importance of vertu and the perceived role of the académie in inculcating
it in the French nobility. In 1598, the Venetian ambassador writes that Henri IV
supported the founding of Pluvinel’s academy “in order to educate his nobility as
virtuously as possible.”
173
In 1604, Pelletier remarks on the academies’ potential to
teach virtue and all the other qualities that a nobleman should possess.
174
Pluvinel,
writing toward the end of the second decade of the seventeenth century, makes
multiple references to virtue in his Instruction du Roy.
175
He says of his students that
ou acquises pour le bien ou pour le mal”) or to social mores in a larger sense (e.g., the habits or
customs of a given group or nation). Even when it had overtones of right and wrong, however, it did
not necessarily mean moral as that term commonly is understood in modern English usage: especially
in the worldview of an early modern French nobleman, right and wrong might have little to do with
modern conceptions of moral or immoral. Given the context and manner in which Pluvinel,
Pontaymery, and other noblemen cited in this study use these words, a more appropriate translation is
not “morals” but rather “the habits or standards of vertu as understood by the traditional nobility of
France.” That phraseology being too unwieldy for frequent use, this study avoids the word “morals”
and instead translates mœurs as “habits and behaviors” or something similar.
172
“Pluvinel … s’est devotieusement offert à la Noblesse pour luy servir d’eschelle & de marche-pié
aux choses les plus eslevees & plus glorieuses que la vertu puisse assigner à ceux qui la recherchent
…”; “[Il a] dressé un temple à la vertu: car à la verité dire, il n’instruit pas seulement le Gentil-
homme en la profession du maniage, mais en la pratique des bonnes mœurs …”; “[E]n l’Academie du
sieur de Pluvinel, vous avez tellement en usage ce qui est de la substance de la vertu mesme …”;
“C’est pourquoy ie te renvoye chez le sieur de Pluvinel, comme en l’eschole & au vray oracle &
temple de la vertu.” Pontaymery, L’Academie, 2
r
, 3
r
, 7
v
, 56
v
, respectively.
173
Duodo, “Relazione di Francia,” 103, cited by Hoche, “Pluvinel et les académies,” 882-883.
174
Pelletier, Nourriture de la noblesse, 96, cited by Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 131. This is Schalk’s
assessment of Pelletier words; in this instance, Schalk does not provide either the original French or
his own translation of it.
175
Although this text was published in 1625, its genesis was somewhat earlier. Pluvinel died in 1620,
and it is clear from his text that he wrote the book at the request of Louis XIII and that that request
128
“they have no aim other than the desire to learn virtue,” and he tells his royal pupil,
Louis XIII (1610-1643), that by supporting the noble academies he will “instruct his
nobility in virtue.”
176
Both Pluvinel and Louis repeatedly refer to them as “escoles
de vertu” and “escoles vertueuses.”
177
Antoine Arnauld, who studied at Benjamin’s
academy in the 1630s, describes his instructor in terms of his ability to teach virtue
to noble students: “He tried in particular to shape [his pupils’] habits and behaviors;
and never was there anyone more appropriate to develop virtue in young
persons….”
178
In 1650, Menou echoes and expands on the words of Pluvinel and
Louis XIII, calling the academies “escolles de vertu,” “escolles vertueuses,”
“colleges d’armes & de vertu,” “belles escolles d’honneur & de vertu.”
179
Writing in
1664, Delcampe not only reconfirms the importance of vertu and the role of the
academy in teaching it, he also ties both of them directly to horsemanship. He says
was made while the king was Pluvinel’s student (Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 190-191). According
to Terrebasse, Pluvinel, 32-33, Louis’s physician, Jean Hérouard, made the following note regarding
the king in his Journal: “Un lundi, le 6 juillet 1615, le Roi se rendit au Grand-Parterre où M. de
Pluvinel, un de ses écuyers …, lui montra, pour la première fois, à monter, sur un petit cheval noir
nommé le Couchon….” Although Pluvinel’s book has a convoluted publication history, we can
conclude from the above that the ideas it contains date from between 1615, when Louis began taking
instruction from Pluvinel, and 1620, when Pluvinel died. There also is an engraving of Louis in the
book entitled “le Roi, âgé de seize ans.” Since Louis was born on 27 September 1601, it is tempting
to suggest that this narrows the date of composition to between 1617 and 1620, but the engravings for
the book were done separately and may not correlate with its composition. For the publication history
of Pluvinel’s text, see chap. 4, “The Sources and Their Relevance,” subsection “The Authors and
Their Texts.”
176
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 82, 205; see also 194, where Pluvinel includes virtue as the first in a
long list of qualities and skills that the French nobility wish “passionately” to learn (see n. 199, below,
for the actual passage).
177
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 199, 204.
178
“Il s’appliquoit particulièrement à regler les mœurs; et jamais personne ne fut plus propre à former
les jeunes gens à la vertu….” Antoine Arnauld, Mémoires, in Collection complète des mémoires
relatifs à l’histoire de France, depuis l'avènement de Henri IV jusqu’à la paix de Paris conclue en
1763 …, ed. Claude-Bernard Petitot, ser. 2, vol. 34 (Paris: Foucault, 1824), 134, cited by Hoche,
“Pluvinel et les académies,” 909. See Dewald, Aristocratic Experience, 82, for the date of Arnauld’s
attendance chez Benjamin.
179
Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 233, 239, 242, 243 passim.
129
that riding is “attached to virtue,” that the académie is “the place where virtue is
incessantly practiced,” and that the riding master is as a father to the nobles he
instructs, “having given them a true education, taught them virtue, and trained them
in the exercise that puts the final polish on and gives the ultimate mark of excellence
to true noblesse.”
180
As for the continued importance of military skills and the emerging
importance of more courtly attributes as key elements of noble self-perception and
definition, these are revealed not only through contemporary commentaries on the
academies but also through descriptions of the curriculum at these institutions. As
already noted, sources on the earliest schools are scarce: we have two literary
descriptions of the curriculum at Pluvinel’s academy, one written by Pontaymery in
1595 and one written by Pluvinel himself ca. 1615-1620, and we have archival
evidence of the curriculum at the academy founded at Aix-en-Provence in 1611.
181
Unsurprisingly, the accounts of Pontaymery and Pluvinel, both describing the
same institution’s curriculum, albeit a number of years apart, match quite closely.
These are, however, purely literary sources and therefore may not be as reliable as
180
Delcampe, “De l’Excellence de l’art de monter à cheval,” 1, 3, 6, respectively; see also 5.
181
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 199-201; Pontaymery, L’Academie, 3
r
; A.N. O
1
915, fols. 181-184,
cited by Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 188-191. La Broue also describes a curriculum for the education
of young noblemen, but his remarks are addressed to the privately employed écuyer working in the
household of a grand, rather than to the director of an academy; see La Broue, separately paginated
“Avis … sur le debvoir de l’escuyer de grande escuyrie,” 18-22, in Le Cavalerice françois
(immediately following the “Privilege du Roy” at the end of Book 3). The secondary literature
specifically on the curricula at the academies is thin and adds little of importance to what is revealed
in the primary materials. Nordhaus, “Arma et Litterae,” 209-214, offers a useful survey of curricular
suggestions made in several other contemporary texts on noble education; see also Baumgartner,
France in the Sixteenth Century, 262; Chartier, Compère, and Julia, Education en France, 181;
Nordhaus, “Arma et Litterae,” 224, 231; Philippe Ariès, L’Enfant et la vie familiale sous l’Ancien
Régime (Paris: Plon, 1960), 223.
130
archival materials. Schalk’s close examination of the documents for the academy at
Aix makes it abundantly clear, however, that the school there offered almost exactly
the same combination of subjects, which indicates that the descriptions of
Pontaymery and Pluvinel are in fact accurate.
Regarding the curriculum at other early schools, Schalk notes that the king’s
letter, establishing the academy at Aix, stipulates that the new institution should be
modeled on existing schools in Paris. As a result, Schalk argues, the curricula at the
various academies founded in Paris—or at least at those founded prior to 1611—may
be deduced from the evidence available for Aix.
182
Perhaps the strongest argument
for deducing from this scant source material the curriculum at the early Parisian and
provincial academies is that the evidence for the second half of the seventeenth
century, both literary and archival, shows an astonishing consistency in the academy
curriculum.
Two of these literary sources are the treatises of Menou and Delcampe, in
which the authors both describe academy curricula. Menou’s description is in a
supplemental essay on the prevention of dueling, which appears only in the 1650
edition of his text, so his account—or at least its publication—can be reliably dated
to that year. It is difficult to judge, however, how well Menou’s description reflects
the program of instruction at an academy at mid-century, because the section of his
text that contains that description is almost identical to that in Pluvinel’s text of
182
“The king’s letter establishing the academy states that its formation and institution should be ‘in
the form and manner that is practiced in our city of Paris.’ By examining the Aix academy, therefore,
we should be able to learn substantially what the Parisian academies were like….” Schalk, Valor to
Pedigree, 188; the quote is from A.N. O
1
915, fol. 181.
131
twenty-five years earlier: Menou was Pluvinel’s student, and there are many areas of
overlap in their texts.
183
Delcampe’s thoughts on noble education, on the other hand,
are original to him. They are in a separately paginated essay on the “excellence” of
horsemanship, which appears in both the initial 1658 edition of his text and the
revised and expanded second edition of 1664. Without access to a copy of the first
edition, it is impossible to know whether this essay was revised and expanded for the
second edition or if it was retained in its original form. Either way, however,
Delcampe’s description of the typical academy curriculum of his day makes it clear
that ca. 1660 the program of instruction still adhered very closely to that described in
the earlier treatises and in the archival materials for the academy at Aix.
184
Here again, these texts are both literary sources, and—Menou’s possible
plagiarism totally aside—they may not accurately reflect actual practice. Dumolin
assures us, however, that the archival sources from the late seventeenth century on
all substantiate the supposition that the curriculum at noble academies retained its
original contours over time. He says categorically:
The comparison of the scope of Pluvinel’s academy under Henri IV, with that
of Vendeuil’s academy in 1692 and of Villemotte’s academy on the eve of
183
Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 233-236. Because this text is so similar to Pluvinel’s, Menou’s
version is not cited here; see nn. 194-197, below, for the parallel material from Pluvinel. For further
details on the similarities between the work of Menou and his mentor, see chap. 4, “The Sources and
Their Relevance,” subsection “The Authors and Their Texts.”
184
Delcampe, “De l’Excellence de l’art de monter à cheval,” 3-5. According to Delcampe, an
académiste of his day could expect to study manège equitation, running at the ring, fencing, dance,
military theory and practice in considerable detail, “practical” geometry, fortifications, geography, “la
carte” (probably the drawing of maps rather than cartography in the literal sense), history, unspecified
“letters,” music, and lute-playing. As will be seen below, this program of study coincides closely
with that offered by Pluvinel and at the academy in Aix.
132
the Revolution, proves that the instruction at these establishments remained
consistent over the course of two centuries.
185
Numerous other modern scholars concur. Motley and Dumolin both cite the
règlement of 1691, in which the grand écuyer stipulates the program of instruction
for the Parisian academies; Babeau and Dumolin both reference the curriculum at the
Parisian academies of Jouan and Dugard in the early 1760s; Hoche echoes
Dumolin’s assessment of Villemotte’s program a few years before the Revolution.
186
And indeed, when one compares the programs of instruction described in these
various sources, they are strikingly similar.
187
All of this suggests that the meager
evidence we have for the curriculum at two of the earliest schools—one Parisian, one
provincial—does, in fact, represent the bigger picture.
That being the case, what could the young gentilhomme of the early
seventeenth century expect to learn at one of these académies, and what role did
mounted activities play therein? Pontaymery’s succinct summary of the subjects
offered at Pluvinel’s school immediately after it opened does not actually say much
about the amount of horsemanship in the curriculum, which we know from
185
“[L]a comparaison des cadres de l’Académie Pluvinel sous Henri IV, avec ceux de l’Académie de
Vendeuil en 1692 et de l’Académie de Villemotte à la veille de la Révolution, prouve que
l’enseignement de ces établissements resta semblable à lui-même pendant deux siècles.” Dumolin,
“Académies parisiennes,” pt. 3, 568. All his statements pertaining to academy curricula from the
1670s on are based on archival materials, cited in the sections of his article where he discusses each
school on an individual basis.
186
Babeau, Les Officiers, 34-35; Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” pt. 2, 485-486 (1691 règlement),
and pt. 3, 568 n. 2 (Jouan and Dugard); Hoche, “Pluvinel et les académies,” 919; Motley, Becoming a
French Aristocrat, 142.
187
They all offer instruction in equitation, fencing, dance, vaulting, military exercises, and math.
Beyond that “core” group of subjects, the only differences are minor ones: some establishments also
offered lessons in writing, drawing, history, geography, modern languages, and/or music, while others
did not. As will be seen below, this curricular model again is very similar to that at Pluvinel’s school
and at the academy in Aix.
133
Pluvinel’s account to have been substantial. Perhaps this is because Pontaymery
simply assumed that his target audience—young noblemen who otherwise would
have gone to Italy to study at one of the riding academies there—would know that
horsemanship would rank high on the list of subject matter at any establishment that
was under the direction of an écuyer and that was proposing itself as a substitute for
a trip to Italy. Certainly he implies as much by beginning his list of subjects rather
jocularly with a question suggesting that students at Pluvinel’s school may be glad to
hear there are things to do there that do not involve a horse:
Tired of horseback riding? You have vaulting [voltige
188
], fencing, and
dance, all under experts whom [Pluvinel] happily knew how to choose and
who are without contest the best at their arts. You also have mathematics,
painting, and lute-playing under the most excellent masters that one could
possibly wish….
189
188
DAF, s.v. “voltiger,” defines the verb as “terme de manege. Faire differentes sortes d’exercices sur
le cheval de bois pour s’accoustumer à monter à cheval sans estriers.” In a passage discussing the
various mounted activities taught at the academies, Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” pt. 3, 569,
indicates that they included “la voltige sur le cheval de bois ou sur le cheval tenu à la longe” (i.e., on a
large circle at the end of a long rope, or longe line, which is held by a dismounted individual standing
at the center of the circle). His footnote for the entire passage cites sources from 1663, 1767, and
1892 but does not specify which is the source for his statement regarding voltige, so this could be a
contemporary definition or a late nineteenth-century one. Hoche, “Pluvinel et les académies,” 878,
says that the écuyer taught all the mounted exercises designated by the term voltige; in the related
footnote, he distinguishes between “la voltige équestre” and “la voltige simple, sorte de
gymnastique,” taught by the dancing master. Hoche offers no evidence for his interpretation, but
elsewhere he cites a 1560 document indicating that the “maître-balladin” for the pages of the grande
écurie taught both dance and voltige and adds: “il était à la fois maître de danse et maître de
gymnastique” (“Pluvinel et les académies,” 892 n. 4). Other modern scholars thus have been perhaps
too quick to translate voltige simply as gymnastics, when in fact contemporary documents indicate
that some or even most of the time it could involve a horse, either wooden or living. In the latter case,
the modern English-language equivalent would be vaulting, or gymnastic exercises performed either
on a stationary “cheval de bois” (the learning phase) or on a live horse circling on a longe line (the
ultimate goal). This interpretation is further supported by the secondary meanings of voltiger in DAF,
all of which have to do in some way with turning or circling; see also Larousse, s.v. “voltige,” which
translates the term, when used in reference to horseback riding, as “mounted gymnastics”; none of the
other possible meanings given is “gymnastics” on its own. Given all the above, this study translates
voltiger as “vaulting” throughout, with the understanding that this could refer to exercises performed
on either a stationary wooden horse or a moving live one.
189
“S’est on exercé au maniage? vous avez le voltigement, l’escrime & la danse, le tout sous des
personnages que ledict sieur a sçeu heureusement choisir, & qui sont hors de controverse les premiers
134
Already the blend of old and new is evident here. Learning how to properly handle a
horse and an edged weapon were traditional martial skills. Vaulting, both mounted
and dismounted, built the future soldier’s physical strength, coordination, and
flexibility, and instruction in math and drawing also were intended as preparation for
a career in the technologically more sophisticated military climate of the seventeenth
century.
190
The ability to play a musical instrument, on the other hand, was a purely
en leur art. Vous y avez encore les Mathematiques, la peinture & le lut sous les plus excellens
maistres que l’on puisse desirer….” Pontaymery, L’Academie, 3
r
. A few years later the Venetian
ambassador offers a similar description of Pluvinel’s curriculum: “Il leur enseigne à monter à cheval
et tous les exercices qui se rapportent à l’equitation. Il leur procure des maîtres d’escrime, de table, de
musique, de mathematique….” Duodo, “Relazione di Francia,” 103, cited by Hoche, “Pluvinel et les
académies,” 883. Looking back more than half a century later, Sauval echoes their assessments:
“Pluvinel … est le premier qui ait tenu un Manege à Paris, & mis à Cheval les Gentils hommes …; &
afin de rendre ses Ecoliers adroits en tout & leur procurer tous les avantages qui sont necessaires à un
homme de guerre, il prit chés lui des Maîtres pour leur apprendre à voltiger, à faire des armes, à
manier la pique, à danser, à jouer du Luth, à dessiner; & de plus, les Mathematiques & beaucoup
d’autres choses bienseantes à des personnes de qualité.” Sauval, Histoire de Paris, 2:498. Sauval’s
list is particularly interesting, not only for the affinity it implies at the time that Pluvinel’s academy
was active between things that are “necessaires à un homme de guerre” and those that are
“bienseantes à des personnes de qualité,” but also for the fact that Sauval, writing in the middle of the
seventeenth century, still seems entirely comfortable with that affinity.
190
Hale, “Military Education,” 236-237, offers a good summary of the potential military applications
of both math and drawing: “Mathematics was needed as a background to fortification, gunnery and
the marshalling of troops …, and also enough drawing to design a fort and map a plan of campaign.”
Motley cites the maréchal de Vauban (1633-1707), renowned military engineer under Louis XIV, as
stating that officers needed to know “a goodly smattering of mathematics, to not be ignorant of
fortifications or geography, and … [to] know, if not how to draw well, at least how to sketch
passably.” Sébastien Le Prestre de Vauban, “Les Sciences les plus convenables aux gens de guerre,”
in Vauban, sa famille et ses écrits, ses oisivetés et sa correspondance: Analyse et extraits, by Albert
de Rochas d’Aiglun, 2 vols. (Paris: Berger-Levrault, 1910), 1:337, cited and translated by Motley,
Becoming a French Aristocrat, 151. Speaking of mathematics, Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,”
pt. 3, 571, concurs that “leur enseignement, lié à celui de l’art militaire, se bornait aux premiers
éléments d’arithmétique et de géométrie nécessaires pour tracer un front bastionné, ouvrir une
tranchée ou diriger une sape”; see also Christian, Art équestre à Paris, 58, who notes that academy
students learned mathematics “pour savoir bien fortifier les places, les attaquer & les défendre”; Faret,
Honneste Homme, 26, who says that the honnête homme should know of math “ce qui sert à un
Capitaine, comme de fortifier regulierement, et de tirer des plans, d’adjouster, soustraire, multiplier et
diviser pour se rendre facile à l’exercice de former des bataillons …”; Motley, Becoming a French
Aristocrat, 150-151, who discusses the relationship between the type of math taught at the academy
and the needs of the general officer for contemporary military applications, especially vis-à-vis
fortifications.
135
social skill, and dancing helped develop the physical grace and sprezzatura so
necessary to the prospective courtier.
191
In this latter sense, vaulting, fencing, and
horsemanship played dual roles, as they, too, enhanced the student’s ability to
perform with the appearance of natural elegance and effortless spontaneity.
192
In chronological terms, the next curricular description is the one for the
academy at Aix. Schalk has carefully reviewed the relevant archival documents and
gives a detailed description of the subjects offered there. He begins by emphasizing
that mounted activities played a starring role:
Riding and horsemanship were indeed the main subjects…. But these
subjects, or even training in arms, were not the only ones taught.
Mathematics, writing, and dancing all had their maîtres. “The Mathematics
master,” the regulations stated, “will teach mathematics and drawing
[dessin]….” The maître à écrire would also teach arithmetic, while “the
Dancing Master will teach them how to walk, salute, and dance, and once a
month will organize a ball for them so they can impress and spur each other
on [piquer d’émulation] in all three exercises.” Music was added as a main
subject five years later in 1616.
Mathematics, the sources suggest, was … in the curriculum … to help
teach the young nobles the art of making fortifications. Thus it essentially
had a military purpose, like much of the rest of the curriculum. But dancing,
music, and learning how to marcher and saluer in the right way were factors
191
Hoche is particularly eloquent on the function and importance of dance, which he says “ne pouvait
être omise” from the academy curriculum: “Mais au XVII
e
siècle, la danse n’était pas comme de nos
jours un simple amusement, un divertissement occasionnel et momentané…. La danse était
considérée comme une gymnastique d’un genre spécial et plus gracieux, propre à donner de l’aisance
aux attitudes, et à mettre ainsi en valeur l’élégance naturelle des formes…. Le maître à danser
montrait à ses élèves à marcher avec distinction, à se tenir dans un cercle, à saluer les dames, à
s’asseoir, à monter en voiture, et finalement à danser.” Hoche, “Pluvinel et les académies,” 891-893.
192
Christian, Art équestre à Paris, 57-58, cites an unidentified contemporary source—possibly Michel
de Marolles, abbé de Villeloin (1600-1681), but that is not at all clear from the notes—regarding the
dual function of these activities. According to this source, when the young gentleman reaches the age
of fifteen or sixteen, “on le doit mettre à l’académie pour apprendre à se bien servir d’un cheval, à
tirer des armes & à danser. Ces exercices le fortifieront, le feront marcher de bonne grâce, la tête
haute, la vue ferme, le visage toujours gai & civil.”
136
of a quite different sort, ones that were going to help lead to a different
definition of nobility in the coming years.
193
The blending of old and new beliefs about what was important for a nobleman to
know is even more clearly reflected here than in the previous example. Riding, arms
training, mathematics, and drawing all were potentially useful to someone planning a
military career. Music, writing, and dancing, walking, and greeting one’s peers in a
manner designed to impress, on the other hand, were far more likely to be of benefit
at court than in combat. And it must not be forgotten that the type of horsemanship
taught by the écuyers of this period was just as useful for the development of grace
and sprezzatura as it was for the honing of strictly military skills.
Pluvinel’s description of the curriculum to be offered at his school is by far
the most detailed of the three and therefore sheds the most light on shifting beliefs
about the meaning of noblesse. Pluvinel begins by saying that the riding master or
écuyer will run the establishment and teach riding. The instructional staff also will
include a “Tireur d’armes, Maistre à dancer, voltigeur, Mathematicien [&] un
homme de lettres.”
194
The latter is to lecture students on “toutes vertus morales,” or
“des moeurs,” using examples drawn from ancient and modern history as
illustrations; on politics, including how to govern provinces, cities, and fortresses; on
how to conduct oneself in war, as both a commander and a soldier; and on how to
193
Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 190-191; quotes are from A.N. O
1
915, fol. 183, the information on the
addition of music from fol. 184. On the shifting roles over time of the various masters, see also
Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” pt. 3, 567-568.
194
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 199. Pontaymery, Duodo, and Sauval all maintain that Pluvinel’s
establishment also offered instruction in music, and Pontaymery and Duodo mention lessons in
painting or drawing (see n. 189, above, for the relevant quotes).
137
serve the king, whether as his ambassador or in some other capacity, both in peace
and in war.
195
The duties of the mathematician are never clearly defined, but—as
Schalk and many other scholars have pointed out—most contemporary sources
dealing with noble education suggest that young nobles be taught those aspects of
math that will be useful to them in war, particularly in the context of fortifications, so
that almost certainly was Pluvinel’s intent as well. The duties of the other
instructors—the masters of equitation, fencing, dance, and vaulting—are precisely
what one would expect them to be.
Pluvinel also includes a highly specific breakdown of the curricular schedule:
All morning would be employed for manège work [l’exercice de la
cavallerie] and for running at the ring; the afternoons of Monday,
Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday for fencing, dancing, vaulting, and
mathematics. For the two others, that is, Tuesday and Thursday afternoons, it
would be appropriate that he whom I have called above “homme de lettres”
lecture in the presence of all the assembled young people.
196
Finally, Pluvinel suggests that one additional day per month be devoted to military
instruction of a more hands-on nature. Students will be attired in full armor, just as
195
“Premierement de toutes vertus morales, ensemble des exemples qui se tirent des histoires tant
anciennes que modernes pour les esclairsir: & apres les avoir instruits sur ce qui depend des moeurs,
passer à la Politique, comme la partie la plus necessaire: & là-dessus leur monstrer la forme qu’il faut
tenir pour gouverner les Provinces, les villes & les places que vostre Majesté leur peut remettre entre
les mains: comme il faut se maintenir aux armees, soit pour commander, soit pour obeïr: comme
quoy servir son Maistre, soit en Ambassade, soit en quelqu’autre affaire particuliere: Bref, tascher par
ce moyen de les rendre capables de bien servir leur Prince, soit en paix, soit en guerre.” Pluvinel,
Instruction du Roy, 200. As can be seen from the phrasing in the opening lines of this passage, when
Pluvinel uses the term “vertus morales” to describe one of the lecture topics to be delivered at his
proposed academy, he clearly thinks of it as synonymous to mœurs. See n. 171, above, for the
contemporary meanings of these terms.
196
“Toute la matinee seroit employee pour l’exercice de la Cavallerie, & pour courre la bague[;]
d’apres-dinee, sçavoir le Lundy, Mercredy, Vendredy & Samedy, pour les exercices de tirer des
armes, dancer, voltiger, & les Mathematiques. Et pour les deux autres, sçavoir le Mardy & le Ieudy
l’apres-disnee, il seroit à propos que celuy que cy-dessus i’ay qualifié homme de lettres, traitast en
presence de toute cette jeunesse assemblee.” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 200.
138
they would be in an actual battle, and they will engage in mounted games (either
tilting or running at the ring) that will teach them skills useful in combat, or they will
be taken out into the countryside to practice a wide variety of military exercises,
some on horseback, some on foot.
197
Pluvinel’s detailed description of the academy curriculum emphasizes yet
again the dual nature of this new type of noble education, “offering knowledge
halfway between the scholarly and the stylish, the courtly and the martial.”
198
Pluvinel further underscores the polyvalent purpose of the academy’s program of
study when he explains to Louis XIII what the French nobility hopes to gain from
this unique combination of subjects:
The entire nobility of this state is more passionately desirous of being
instructed in vertu, in civility, in courtesy, in good habits and behaviors, in
propriety, in doing well at its exercices, both the martial [ones] and those that
are done for pleasure and because they are becoming, than of any other
thing….
199
197
“Considerant qu’il y a plusieurs qui se meslent de mener des chevaux, & de porter une espee, qui
se treuveroient fort estonnez s’ils se voyoient à cheval, armez de toutes pieces … ie desirerois tous les
mois choisir un jour de feste, & apres le service de Dieu, ayant nombre suffisant de Noblesse, en faire
armer, soit pour courre la bague, soit pour rompre en lice, soit pour sortir à la campagne, pour là leur
apprendre la maniere d’aller au combat, le moyen d’attaquer une escarmouche, la forme de se retirer.
Bref, tout l’ordre de la guerre, & faire ces combats tantost à cheval tantost à pied, en faisant faire des
forts de terre, & les faire attaquer & deffendre à cette ieunesse (selon leur force) pour leur enseigner à
bien attaquer une place, & à la bien deffendre, donner les commandemens alternativement aux uns, &
aux autres, afin de les rendre tous dignes de bien commander & bien obeïr.” Pluvinel, Instruction du
Roy, 200-201.
198
“[L]es académies … participent à l’élaboration d’une nouvelle éducation noble, à mi-chemin d’une
culture savante et mondaine, d’une culture de cour et de guerre.” Corinne Doucet, “Les Académies
équestres ou l’école de la noblesse,” in Les Echanges entre les universités européennes à la
Renaissance, ed. Michel Bideaux and Marie-Madeleine Fragonard (Geneva: Droz, 2003), 129. Arditi,
Genealogy of Manners, 107-108, also comments on the two-sided behavior expected of court nobles,
who were the ones most likely to attend an academy: “Elegance, parsimony of movement, decorum,
moderation, sociability, and courtesy in general, are unquestionably attributes of courtiership. But the
concern with virility, strength, physical fitness, agility, and the exercises associated with the education
of the good warrior are equally central.”
199
“[T]oute la Noblesse de cest Estat est plus passionnement desireuse d’estre instruite à la vertu, à la
civilité, à la courtaisie, aux bonnes mœurs, à la proprieté, à bien faire les exercices, soit des armes,
139
Here Pluvinel is stating that, no matter what pragmatic purpose the skills taught at an
academy might have for either soldiers or courtiers, an equally important collateral
benefit is that this educational program will instruct students in all the personal
attributes, both old and new, that comprise authentic noblesse. The curriculum at
these schools taught students all the qualities of traditional vertu—both the strictly
martial and the more universally applicable—as well as all the qualities associated
with the Castiglionesque model of the ideal courtier: civilité, courtoisie, bonnes
mœurs, bienséance, politesse, grâce, and sprezzatura.
200
The most important aspect of Pluvinel’s outline, at least for the purposes of
this study, is the role that horsemanship is going to play in teaching all these things
to noblemen. Six days per week, all morning long, are to be devoted solely to
“l’exercice de la cavallerie” and the mounted game of running at the ring. Taken out
of the larger context of Pluvinel’s book as a whole, “la cavallerie” may seem to refer
soit de ceux qui se font pour le plaisir, & pour la bien-seance, que de toute autre chose….” Pluvinel,
Instruction du Roy, 194.
200
Several scholars comment specifically on the academy’s role in helping to develop the more
courtly aspects of noble identity during this period. For example, Doucet, “Académies équestres,”
129, says of these schools: “Elles reflètent l’essor d’une culture du corps de plus en plus caractérisée
par la conception raffinée du paraître”—literally, appearances. The concept of paraître was
intimately related to and dependent on physical grace and sprezzatura, or the appearance of
effortlessness that made graceful movement seem totally natural and spontaneous in those of noble
birth. All of these concepts became increasingly important over the course of the seventeenth century,
especially among the high and court nobles, those most likely to attend one of these schools. Motley,
Becoming a French Aristocrat, 123-124, concurs: “The academy was especially important to
aristocratic education during the seventeenth century because it met [the] principal needs of those
nobles most influenced by the court and its social codes…. The academy was a vector for the code of
graceful behavior derived from the Italian Renaissance, which was adopted at court and placed special
emphasis on the exhibition of the body as a sign of social status…. The academy was intimately
related to … the growing role of the absolutist court and its social codes of ‘natural’ grace and
gentility…. The training that nobles received there allowed them to demonstrate their ‘natural’
physical grace as a sign of social superiority….” For additional sources on the relationship between
noble education, the concepts of “natural” grace and paraître, and the nobility’s growing concern with
bodily discipline and control, see n. 505, below.
140
to riding in some general sense. When this passage is put back into that larger
context, however, it is clear that “la cavallerie” refers not just to horsemanship in
general but to manège equitation quite specifically, because the new riding style is
the overarching topic of Pluvinel’s book. Fully half of every day’s instruction thus is
to consist of manège riding and the mounted game most closely tied to it, la course
de bague.
201
That fact alone means that more time is to be devoted to these specific
forms of horsemanship than to all the other subjects and activities combined. Even
the monthly activities are heavily weighted toward a mounted context: running at
the ring and tilting always were performed on horseback, and Pluvinel’s description
of the other military skills to be practiced on those trips into the countryside make it
clear that many of them were mounted ones. The amount of time spent on equestrian
activities, and especially on manège equitation and the mounted games related to it,
thus was proportionately enormous.
This study is not the first to call attention to this extremely heavy emphasis
on horsemanship. Albert Babeau remarks when speaking of the subjects taught at
the academies:
Here, the art of horseback riding dominated all the others…. Never did this
[art] have more importance and splendor than in the seventeenth century.
The beautiful books of Pluvinel and Salomon de la Broue, no less than the
superb carrousels of the period, attest to the degree to which it was esteemed.
201
Although all the mounted games of this period involved at least some prior experience with
selected manège movements, running at the ring—la course de bague—required a particularly
complex set of maneuvers, both preceding and following the actual “running” (course) portion of the
game. Without substantial skill in manège equitation, a correct performance while engaging in this
game therefore was impossible. For contemporary descriptions of the game’s complexities, see La
Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:123-126; P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 145-149;
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 146-171; Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 159-180; Delcampe, Art de
monter à cheval, 197-223.
141
It is first among all the arts of the nobleman [homme d’épée].
202
Dumolin not only notes Pluvinel’s equestrian-heavy curriculum but also points out
that it held true for later schools as well: “Equitation … forms the core of this
program; the rest is only secondary, and so it will be until the end of the eighteenth
century.”
203
As evidence of the centrality of horsemanship to the academy
curriculum, Babeau, Dumolin, and Hoche all cite the journal of two young
Dutchmen who came to Paris in the late 1650s to study at the academy of Delcampe,
in which they speak eloquently of the rigors of the riding regimen there:
We ride three horses every day, not counting the one for running at the ring.
At the beginning this regimen is so harsh that we cannot get started until the
pain in our legs has passed: it is so bad at first that we can barely walk and,
to comfort us even further, another student tells us that we will have to suffer
thus for two whole weeks, which we in fact experienced.
204
At the end of the century, the program remained unchanged. Citing the 1691 rule for
these schools, Motley says: “Riding lessons had the place of honor in the academy’s
curriculum and in the late seventeenth century were taught every morning from
202
“L’art de monter à cheval y dominait tous les autres…. Jamais celui-ci n’eut plus d’importance et
d’éclat qu’au dix-septième siècle. Les beaux ouvrages de Pluvinel et de Salomon de la Broue, non
moins que les superbes carrousels de l’époque, attestent combien il était en estime. C’est le premier
de tous les arts de l’homme d’épée.” Babeau, Les Officiers, 29-30.
203
“[L]’équitation … fait le fond de ce programme; le reste n’est que l’accessoire, et il en sera ainsi
jusqu’à la fin du XVIII
e
siècle.” Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” pt. 3, 568.
204
“Nous y montons tous les jours trois chevaux, sans compter celuy de bague. Cet exercice est si
rude au commencement que nous n’en pouvons commencer d’autre que la douleur de nos cuisses soit
passée: elle est telle d’abord qu’à peine peut-on marcher et, pour nous bien consoler, un académiste
nous dit que nous aurions à la souffrir quinze jours durant, comme nous l’avons en effect
expérimenté.” Prosper Faugère and Léon Marillier, eds., Journal du voyage de deux jeunes
hollandais à Paris, en 1656-1658, new ed. (Paris: Champion, 1899), 90-91 (journal entry for 6 March
1657), cited by Hoche, “Pluvinel et les académies,” 914. Babeau, Les Officiers, 31, and Dumolin,
“Académies parisiennes,” pt. 3, 569, cite the same passage, although Dumolin cites an earlier edition:
A. P. Faugère, ed., Journal du voyage … (Paris: Duprat, 1862), 84.
142
about seven o’clock until noon.”
205
As noted earlier, Dumolin’s comparative
examination of two late eighteenth-century schools indicates that the curriculum
continued virtually unchanged right up to the Revolution.
Given that the goal of the academy curriculum was to instruct students in all
the attributes, both old and new, that comprised the early seventeenth-century noble
ideal, horsemanship obviously was viewed as fundamentally conducive to achieving
that goal. As will be demonstrated shortly, that was precisely the case.
205
Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 142; his source is A.N. O
1
915, fol. 39. According to n. 43
on the same page, “the rule … envisaged two hours of riding lessons (7–9), followed by running at the
ring (9–12).” Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” pt. 2, 485-486, gives additional details from the
1691 règlement, including the following: “Le lever des valets était fixé à 5 heures en été, à 6 en hiver;
celui des élèves une demi-heure après; puis la messe et les exercices de manège; à 9 heures, exercices
de bague; à midi, dîner, puis les armes et la voltige; à 3 heures, danse et mathématiques, exercices du
mousquet et de la pique; à 7 heures, souper, puis récréation dans une sale commune; à 9 heures, prière
et coucher.”
143
CHAPTER 4
The Sources and Their Relevance
The Significance of Manuals of Horsemanship
A surprising number of early modern European horsemen wrote treatises on
the art of manège riding and training. To give some idea of the numbers involved, a
search of the bibliographic sources yielded more than forty texts dealing with this
topic, written in Italian, English, French, or Spanish, and published in their first
editions between 1550 and 1661. The opening date is that of Grisone’s Ordini di
cavalcare, the first extant early modern treatise on riding; the closing date is the
beginning of the personal reign of Louis XIV, during which the shift from the
medieval to the early modern definition of nobility in France was essentially
completed. If the cut-off date were extended to 1800, if all European languages and
Latin were included, if revised and expanded editions were counted, and if texts
dealing with equestrian matters other than manège horsemanship were admitted (for
example, texts on veterinary care, shoeing, breeding, horse management, cavalry,
and so forth), the number would be much higher.
206
Many early modern manuals of horsemanship reveal almost as much about
the culture that produced them as they do about equestrian theory.
207
Certainly this
206
Of the available hippobibliographies, the most exhaustive and reliable are Mennessier and Wells.
Huth’s bibliography, although just as encyclopedic in its coverage, is somewhat less accurate.
207
A few scholars have written on this topic; see Raber, “Reasonable Creatures,” and the following
chapters in The Culture of the Horse: Status, Discipline, and Identity in the Early Modern World, ed.
Karen Raber and Treva J. Tucker (New York: Palgrave, 2005): Pia F. Cuneo, “Just a Bit of Control:
The Historical Significance of Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-Century German Bit-Books”; Elisabeth Le
Guin, “Man and Horse In Harmony”; Karen Raber, “A Horse of a Different Color: Nation and Race in
Early Modern Horsemanship Treatises”; Treva J. Tucker, “Early Modern French Noble Identity and
144
is true of treatises published in France between 1550 and 1661, which tell us a
considerable amount about French noble culture. At their most basic level, these
books reveal the importance of horses and horsemanship in that culture. Far more
important, however, is what they disclose about both continuity and change in the
traditional nobility’s self-perception and definition during this period.
The five particular texts used for this study were chosen for several reasons.
First and most simply, they were selected based on the date of publication of their
first editions. These treatises represent the five earliest works originally written in
French—that is, texts that are not translations from another language—that focus
specifically on manège equitation, including the airs above the ground. They also
are the only five French texts on that topic published between 1550 and 1661, the
period of most interest in terms of changing beliefs about the meaning of noblesse.
Second, these manuals were chosen based on the relationship of their authors
to the larger noble order. All five of the authors were noblemen and therefore were
members of the group whose shifting self-perception and definition this study
explores. With one exception (who is interesting in his own right precisely because
he is an exception), all of these men also were affiliated with the royal court, a noble
académie, or both. As a result, they all were in frequent contact with members of the
high and court nobility and therefore were in a position to observe the beliefs and
behaviors of the group of nobles that usually was the genesis of changes that
eventually trickled down and out to the noble collective more broadly. In several
the Equestrian ‘Airs Above the Ground’”; Kate van Orden, “From Gens d’armes to Gentilshommes:
Dressage, Civility, and the Ballet à Cheval.”
145
cases, the authors were themselves members of the court nobility and thus were not
merely observers of but also participants in the shifts in the noble belief system about
the meaning of noblesse. In the case of those who directed one of the noble
academies, these authors even could be seen as vectors for the portion of that shift
that revolved around new levels of grace, sprezzatura, and cultured and refined
savoir-faire, all of which could be perfected during a stint at one of these new
schools.
As a group, these books are of interest because they were written not only by
nobles but also for nobles. The authors themselves state that no amount of book
learning can ever replace the physical act of riding a horse under the instruction of a
knowledgeable teacher: these texts are intended solely as a supplemental source of
information for those who already know how to ride in the style described in the
books.
208
Access to instruction in manège horsemanship was difficult to obtain in
208
La Broue is particularly eloquent on this issue: “[E]n cest art la lecture, voire des meilleurs
autheurs, ne peut servir que à ceux, qui entendent & sçavent effectuer proprement ce qu’ils lisent …”;
“C’est erreur de croire qu’on se puisse rendre bon Cavalerice, seulement par la lecture, puisque les
effects d’un tel exercice, consistent en l’action & aux iustes mouvemens du corps & des membres, si
ce n’est que voulant effectuer ce qu’on aura leu, on soit assisté & secouru des maistres plus
excellents….” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:4, 2:7, respectively. Delcampe says much the same
thing more than fifty years later: “[I]e n’ay pas iugé estre necessaire d’embarasser la memoire de mes
Lecteurs d’une suite infinie de leçons, qui auroient sans doute esté de peu de fruict, manque de la
grande methode & pratique qu’il faut avoir en cet exercice pour le bien comprendre.” Delcampe, Art
de monter à cheval, 188. Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 141, notes that this insistence on the
futility of the written word in the absence of lessons from a competent master is true of instructional
manuals for all noble exercices, not just riding, and that this attitude facilitated the nobility’s quest to
shut out non-nobles and recent anoblis: “From the point of view of the aristocracy, the relative
difficulty and expense of imitating these exercises was a considerable advantage, for it was much
harder to usurp graceful movement than the exterior signs of nobility such as dress or arms.” This
insistence on the distinction between learning from reading and learning by doing resonates in
interesting ways with Neuschel’s thesis regarding the shift from the oral and the acted in sixteenth-
century noble culture to the literate and the abstract in the seventeenth century; see Word of Honor,
22-23, 103-131 passim, 187-195, 204. At least in the case of horsemanship, that shift is much less
self-evident, not only in terms of early modern noble culture but also in a more general sense: even
146
France outside of a noble académie or at one of the schools for pages affiliated with
the court, attendance at either of which was limited to those of noble birth. Horse
ownership in general and attendance at an academy in particular were extremely
costly, so most readers were not only noble but also wealthy. At least some of these
treatises—Pluvinel’s magnificent volume in particular comes to mind—were
themselves luxury items within the reach only of those with abundant resources.
209
For all these reasons, the intended audience for these texts was indubitably noble.
Finally and most importantly, because these books were written by nobles for
nobles, they are in the end about nobles, even though their purported subject matter
is horsemanship. Through their detailed descriptions of the skills and personal
qualities needed by the noble horseman in order not just to master his mount but to
persuade it to perform the intricate maneuvers of the manège and the dramatic leaps
of the airs relevés, and to do all of that in a manner befitting a gentleman, these
authors reveal a tremendous amount about the content of the noble ideal. Since the
texts used in this study span roughly the first two-thirds of the seventeenth century,
these detailed descriptions also reveal how that ideal slowly changed over time—
and, just as importantly, the ways in which it remained the same. The authors of the
today, it is taken as given that riding can be learned only through (acted) practice and the (oral)
instruction of a qualified expert; books and theory (the literate and the abstract) are merely a
supplement.
209
La Noue unintentionally reveals how costly these treatises tended to be when he states that his
book will be brief and clear, in order to convey to his readers “tout ce qui est contenu de remarquable
en plusieurs volumes, dont les moindres des bons se vendent pour le moins dix ducats en Italie, pour
en épargner la lecture à qui veut tout voir, & avoir en trois mots; & les frais à celuy qui a plus de
volonté de tout acheter, que de moyen d’en payer la moitié.” P. de la Noue, unpaginated prefatory
note “Aux Cavaliers,” in La Cavalerie françoise et italienne (immediately following the title page and
preceding the main text).
147
manuals constantly laud manège horsemanship and the mounted games related to it
for their ability to develop and provide opportunities for the display of many of the
same qualities of traditional vertu that a nobleman would need for successful
performance in warfare. These authors repeatedly emphasize that, in order to ride
well, one needed personal attributes such as courage, boldness, skill, knowledge,
experience, sound judgment, foresight, ingenuity, creativity, patience, resolve, and
flexibility, accuracy, and rapidity of thought and deed while under pressure—all
characteristics that comprised the nobility’s understanding of vertu in the late
sixteenth century, when the earliest of the five treatises was written. Yet their
descriptions of manège movements and of the various games—even those that sound
specifically warlike, such as the maneuvers comprising the “manège de guerre” or a
game such as the “combat à cheval”—make it clear that none of these activities had
much if any relevance for actual battle, the context in which noble virtue usually was
required and displayed. These descriptions also make it clear that, in addition to the
development and display of virtue, another and equally important purpose of both
manège horsemanship and mounted games was the development and display of grace
and sprezzatura, attributes that were only just beginning to become part of the noble
ideal at the end of the sixteenth century. As will be seen later in this study, several
of the authors in fact state that a nobleman who has not learned to ride in a suitably
graceful and sprezzata fashion will at best be considered incomplete and at worst be
disdained by and disgraced before his peers. Through their descriptions of various
mounted activities, the authors of the manuals reveal both that the nobility continued
148
to believe that martial vertu still was a valid component of noble identity and that a
considerable shift in noble self-perception and definition also was taking place.
210
Since this gradual refashioning of the nobility’s belief system about the
meaning of noblesse was part of the nobles’ response to what they perceived as
threats to the very existence of the noble order as they understood it, these texts also
disclose one more facet of the traditional early modern French nobility’s capacity to
adapt to a changing environment it could neither escape nor avoid while
simultaneously retaining enough of its cherished traditions to ease what might
otherwise have been a jarring transition. The repeated mention in these texts of traits
that had been part of the meaning of noble vertu for centuries indicates that the
nobles continued to cling to the overarching concept, which provided a familiar
touchstone in the midst of upheaval. At the same time, the change in virtue’s
context—from the battlefield to the manège—also allowed the nobles to subtly
refashion virtue in ways that responded to certain criticisms by non-nobles and
recent anoblis. By the same token, the repeated mention of the importance of
graceful and apparently effortless performance is a further indication of the nobility’s
willingness to expand its definition and thereby to adjust to unavoidable change.
210
Although this study focuses on the blending of martial vertu with grace and sprezzatura, much the
same thing can be said about the blending of military skills with those qualities, but specifically in the
context of mounted games rather than in the context of manège horsemanship more generally. The
authors laud the games for their ability to develop and provide opportunities for the display of many
of the same military skills that a nobleman would need for successful performance in warfare, yet
their descriptions of the games make it clear that most of the skills needed for successful performance
of those games would have had little if any value in combat (and in some cases would have been
downright detrimental) and that the primary purpose of the games in fact was the development and
display not of military skills but of grace and sprezzatura. The games thus provided the same
combination of continuity and change in terms of military skills that manège horsemanship more
broadly—which included but was not limited to the games—did in terms of vertu.
149
How these shifts in the nobility’s beliefs were related to its lived adaptation
to the military, political, social, and cultural changes it was undergoing during this
period is not, of course, revealed in the manuals of horsemanship, which are purely
literary sources and therefore can tell us very little about changes in the nobility’s
actual practices. As noted in the Introduction, however, there is abundant recent
archivally based secondary literature that demonstrates that the nobility not only
survived but flourished in the second half of the seventeenth century, so it really is
not necessary for the manuals to demonstrate this. What they can and do show is the
continued presence of the qualities of traditional martial vertu in the nobility’s self-
perception and definition, which debunks Schalk’s thesis that, during the early
seventeenth century, virtue was dropped from noble identity in favor of birth. The
manuals also reveal the nobles’ capacity both to subtly alter existing aspects of their
identity and to add new ones in response to their changing environment, which
debunks the older “crisis” thesis that the nobility of this period was sliding
inexorably into decline and obsolescence because of its stubborn resistance to
change, which in turn confirms the revisionist interpretation that the nobility not only
did not decline but thrived.
The Authors and Their Texts
SALOMON DE LA BROUE (d. ca. 1610)
His text: La Broue is best known as the author of Le Cavalerice françois …
contenant les preceptes principaux qu’il faut observer exactement pour bien dresser
150
les chevaux …,
211
which actually is the second edition of his treatise.
212
The dating
of La Broue’s work has created some confusion because of the way in which the
manuals are structured. They each consist of three separate and distinct “books” and,
in some editions, of a fourth section, the “Avis … sur le debvoir de l’escuyer de
grande escuyrie.” Although the three books (and the “Avis,” when present) appear
in a single volume, some or all of the books have separate title pages, often bearing
different dates of publication.
213
In the second edition—the first to bear the title Le
Cavalerice françois—the title page for the first book is dated 1602, while that for the
second book is dated 1608. The third book has no title page, and neither it nor the
“Avis” bear a date at all, but the secondary literature usually dates them 1608 as
well.
According to the two major twentieth-century hippobibliographers, Gabriel
René Mennessier de la Lance and Ellen G. Wells, La Broue’s treatise was reissued
under the title Le Cavalerice françois at least six times between 1608 and 1646 in
211
The full title is Le Cavalerice françois … contenant les preceptes principaux qu’il faut observer
exactement pour bien dresser les chevaux aux exercices de la carriere et de la campagne. Le tout
divisé en trois livres—Le premier traicte de l’ordre general & plus facile des susdicts exercices et de
la propreté du cavalier; Le second des modernes et plus justes proportions de tous les plus beaux airs
et maneges; Le troisieme des qualités de toutes les parties de la bouche du cheval et des divers effects
de plusieurs brides differentes pourtraites et representees par leurs justes mesures aux lieux
necessaires—Seconde edition, reveue et augmentee de beaucoup de leçons et figures par l’autheur
(Paris: Abel l’Angelier, 1602-1608). This is the edition used for this study.
212
The first edition appeared under a slightly different title: Preceptes principaux que les bons
cavalerisses doivent exactement observer en leurs escoles, tant pour bien dresser les chevaux aux
exercices de la guerre & de la carriere que pour les bien emboucher…. Divisez en trois livres: dont
le premier traicte de l’ordre general & plus facile des susdits exercices & de la propreté du cavalier:
Le second des modernes et plus justes proportions de tous les plus beaux airs & maneges: Le
troisieme des qualitez de toutes les parties de la bouche du cheval, ensemble des divers effects de
plusieurs brides differentes, & representees par les figures apposees aux lieux necessaires (La
Rochelle: Hierosme Haultin, 1593-1594).
213
For example, in the first edition, all three books have separate title pages; the first two books are
dated 1593, the third 1594, and the “Avis” is not included.
151
various combinations of existing and revised editions of the three books and with and
without the “Avis.”
214
The precise dates and contents of the various volumes are less
important than the fact that, based solely on its publication history, La Broue’s
treatise clearly was very popular in its time.
His background: La Broue’s exact dates are unknown. His date of birth is
given as either 1530 or 1552, but none of those who offer one of these dates cites a
source for it.
215
Other biographical data raise questions about both dates, so neither
one may be correct.
216
The general consensus for his date of death is 1610; Etienne
Saurel notes that the date of La Broue’s will was October 1609, so it could not have
been much earlier.
217
214
Wells lists an additional printing of the second (1602-1608) edition, dated 1610, which Mennessier
does not show. According to both Wells and Mennessier, a third edition of Le Cavalerice françois
appeared in 1610 and was reissued in 1612, 1613, 1620, and 1628, all without the “Avis”; Wells adds
a sixth printing dated 1618. A fourth and final edition appeared in 1646, which Wells says has four
parts, thus implying the presence of the “Avis.” For additional details on these publications, see
Mennessier, Bibliographie hippique, s.v. La Broue, Salomon de; Wells, Horsemanship: A
Bibliography, s.v. La Broue, Salomon de.
215
Gahwyler, “Legacy of the Masters,” 6, and Monteilhet, Maîtres de l’œuvre équestre, 158, say
1530; Michel Henriquet, “L’Ecole de Versailles,” in Ecuries royales, 192, and Saurel, Histoire de
l’équitation, 209, 213, 216, say 1552.
216
As evidence against a 1552 date of birth, in the preface to the 1602 edition of Book 1, La Broue
speaks of his failing health in “la descente de mon aage” (Cavalerice françois, 1:5). If born in 1552,
he would have been only 50 at this point, which seems young for such a self-description. Several
sources provide similar age-related details from the dedication and the “Advertissement au lecteur” in
Book 1 of the 1593 edition that contradict a 1552 date of birth; see Littauer, Development of Modern
Riding, 40; Mennessier, Bibliographie hippique, s.v. La Broue, Salomon de; Saurel, Histoire de
l’équitation, 216. As will be seen below, a birth date of 1530 is even harder to reconcile with the
biographical data La Broue himself provides in his text.
217
Saurel, Histoire de l’équitation, 216; all the sources in n. 215, above, also say La Broue died in
1610. In the dedication to the duc de Montmorency in the 1608 edition of Book 2, the phrasing
indicates that La Broue was still living when this book was published and lends further support to a
date of death no earlier than around 1610; La Broue, unpaginated dedication “A Monseigneur le Duc
de Mont-morency Pair & Connestable de France,” Le Cavalerice françois, Book 2 (immediately
following the title page and preceding the preface).
152
Most of the biographical data on La Broue come from the preface of Book 1
and the dedication and preface of Book 2 of the second (1602-1608) edition of Le
Cavalerice françois. La Broue tells his readers the following: He is from Gascony,
and in his youth he was a page in the household of the comte d’Aubijoux. After
completing his service as a page, he fought in the civil-religious wars (1562-1598);
he does not specify the dates of his participation.
218
After his stint as a warrior, he
traveled “in various countries outside this realm, until my thirtieth year.”
219
During
these travels, he studied horsemanship with the renowned Neapolitan master,
Gianbattista Pignatelli; again, he does not specify when or for how long he was at
Pignatelli’s academy.
220
Unlike most of the other authors consulted for this study, on the title page of
Book 1 of the 1602-1608 edition of Le Cavalerice françois, La Broue does not
identify himself as “sieur” or “gentilhomme françois.” In the “Privilege du Roy,”
however, he is called “le sieur de la Brouë.”
221
The title page of Book 1 also
identifies La Broue as “Escuyer d’Escurie du Roy et de Monseigneur le Duc
d’Epernon,” posts unlikely to have been held by a non-noble.
222
Perhaps even more
218
“[I]e suis Gascon, eslevé en ma patrie, & nourry page avec beaucoup d’honneur en la maison de
Monseigneur le Compte d’Aubijoux, où ceste premiere saison de ma vie a esté occupee à le suivre
aux armees, à la court, à la chasse, & quelquefois à l’exercice de monter à cheval…. Et depuis avoir
esté mis hors de page, i’ay eu presque d’ordinaire les armes sur le dos, pour n’estre inutile ny oisif en
nos guerres civiles….” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:2.
219
“[I]’ay voyagé en diverses nations hors de ce Royaume, iusques à la trentiesme annee de mon
aage.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:2.
220
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 2:5; see n. 149, above, for the actual quote.
221
Unpaginated “Privilege du Roy,” in Le Cavalerice françois, Book 3, by La Broue (immediately
following the table of contents and preceding the separately paginated “Avis”).
222
The dates of La Broue’s service in either of these posts remain unclear. For what little information
there is, see Littauer, Development of Modern Riding, 40; Mennessier, Bibliographie hippique, s.v. La
Broue, Salomon de; Monteilhet, Maîtres de l’œuvre équestre, 158.
153
telling, in his dedication to the duc de Montmorency in Book 2, La Broue says, “I
have always sought the qualities most becoming to a well born Gentleman,” thus
implying that this is his status; certainly the known details of his biography would
indicate that this is so.
223
His significance: La Broue’s text is important because it was the first treatise
in French on the topic of manège horsemanship and because, based on the number of
times it was reissued, it was read by a significant number of its target audience until
at least the middle of the seventeenth century. Even more importantly for the
purposes of this study, Le Cavalerice françois reflects the views of a nobleman
whose role as a ducal and royal écuyer put him in frequent contact with members of
the high and court nobility. Although La Broue does not explicitly say that his duties
included instructing some of these nobles, it is likely that they did. He was one of
the first noblemen to come back from his studies in Italy armed with sufficient skill
and knowledge to write a book; at a time when such abilities were still rare in
France, he must have been much sought after as an instructor. Given his posts and
his own noble status, La Broue almost certainly would have taught the very nobles
whose beliefs and behaviors were most likely to initiate and then to advance shifts in
the noble ideal. Even if he did not actually instruct the court nobles and merely did
223
“[I]’ay tousiours recherché les qualitez plus seantes au Gentil-homme bien né….” La Broue,
“[Au] Duc de Mont-morency,” Le Cavalerice françois, Book 2. Henri de Damville, duc de
Montmorency (1534-1614), was duke from 1579, constable from 1593. Montmorency’s dates are
further proof that La Broue could not possibly have been born in 1530. In his dedication to the duke,
La Broue says that, when he was “page & encore fort petit,” he noticed that the court nobles all
“taischoient soigneusement à se façonner à la Danville.” There is simply no way that La Broue, if
born in 1530, could have been still a page and “fort petit” when Damville, born four years later, was
old enough to have been setting the standard to be emulated by everyone at court.
154
his job while constantly surrounded by them, La Broue still was exposed on a routine
basis to this group’s views on what constituted the ideal nobleman. Given what is
known about his own background, La Broue probably shared those views, in which
case such exposure simply reinforced his own beliefs. Either way, what La Broue
has to say about the attributes of the successful noble rider and trainer demonstrates
that the gradual reshaping of the nobility’s beliefs about the attributes of a legitimate
nobleman already was well underway by the turn of the century, at least among the
nobles affiliated with the court.
PIERRE DE LA NOUE (late sixteenth – early seventeenth century)
His text: La Noue is the author of La Cavalerie françoise et italienne, ou
L’Art de bien dresser les chevaux …, the first edition of which was published in
1620.
224
According to the “Privilege du Roy,” this “tableau” on how to train the
horse is but the first of a projected four: the second is to cover bits and bitting, the
third breeding (des haras; literally, stud-farms), and the fourth equine anatomy,
illnesses, and remedies. The privilège grants its holder the right “to print, or to have
printed, together or separately, the said Book,” thereby allowing La Noue and his
publisher the freedom to publish the four parts in whatever configuration they
chose.
225
The 1620 tableau on horsemanship was reissued in 1624, this time bound
224
The full title is La Cavalerie françoise et italienne, ou L’Art de bien dresser les chevaux, selon les
preceptes des bonnes ecoles des deux nations. Tant pour le plaisir de la carriere et des carozels que
pour le service de la guerre … (Strasbourg: Iac. de Heyden, 1620). This is the edition used for this
study. For additional information pertaining to certain anomalies in the date and place of publication
of this edition, see Mennessier, Bibliographie hippique, s.v. La Noue, Pierre de; Wells,
Horsemanship: A Bibliography, s.v. La Noue, Pierre de.
225
Unpaginated “Privilege du Roy,” in La Cavalerie françoise et italienne, by P. de la Noue
(immediately following the table of contents at the end of the book).
155
with the second and third tableaux, after which it was not published again.
226
In
comparison to the texts of the other authors used in this study, La Noue’s treatise on
horsemanship thus was not very popular.
His background: Virtually nothing is known about La Noue beyond the scant
details that can be gleaned from his text. The “Privilege du Roy” in the 1620 edition
of La Cavalerie françoise et italienne calls him “le Sieur de la Noue, Gentilhomme
François,”
227
so he was not only noble but also probably noble by birth: the term
“gentilhomme” generally was not used to describe a recent anobli.
In “Aux Cavaliers,” a sort of prefatory note to his readers, La Noue explains
his rationale for publishing his text outside of Paris and, more specifically, away
from the scrutiny and criticism of those affiliated with the court.
228
Although La
226
The full title of the 1624 edition is La Cavalerie françoise, respresentant les haras ou races de
chevaux au plus parfait estat qu’ils se puissent mettre. En faveur de la noblesse curieuse de retirer,
nourrir & eslever de beaux et bons poulains de ses cavales … [the second tableau]; bound with La
Cavalerie françoise, portrayant au vray les moyens de bien donner les mords aux chevaux, selon le
merite de leurs bouches. Avec plusieurs differens desseins tant de cavessons & de branches, que
d’emboucheures & gourmettes [the third tableau]; bound with La Cavalerie françoise ou l’art de bien
dresser les chevaux selon les preceptes des bonnes ecoles de France et d’Italie, tant pour le plaisir de
la carriere & des carozels que pour le service de la guerre [the original first tableau] (Geneva: Pierre
& Iaques Chouet, 1624). A third version of La Noue’s work appeared in 1643; it contained only the
second and third tableaux, while the original 1620 treatise had been dropped. The promised fourth
tableau, on veterinary matters, never materialized at all. Mennessier, Bibliographie hippique, s.v. La
Noue, Pierre de, speculates that La Noue’s books may have been published abroad (Strasbourg in the
case of the 1620 edition, Geneva in the case of the 1624 and 1643 versions) because the author lived
in or frequently visited these locales, perhaps because he was Calvinist.
227
“Privilege du Roy,” in La Cavalerie françoise et italienne, by P. de la Noue.
228
“[P]our prevenir le iugement que les flatteurs des Grands Seigneurs pourroyent donner contre moy,
sur ce que ie mets en campagne cette Cavalerie sans l’aveu de quelque Monarque, ie produis pour ma
iuste défense deux respects bien considerables: le premier est, que … ie ne dois pas, comme petit
oysillon que ie suis, quitter la paix du village, pour m’envoler plus promptement que prudemment à la
felicité de la Cour, de peur que quelque Tiercelet d’Autour affamé ne se fondist si vivement sur moy,
qu’il ne me fist perdre bat & aisles avant que d’en avoir seulement apperceu les girouettes: & le
dernier [est], que … le Dieu que j’adoire ne voudroit … voir ny recevoir ce dessein pour un parfaict
témoignage de mon humilité, n’estant que le commencement de l’ouvrage, dont les quatre feront le
tout. Et partant, concluant que ce m’est encore trop d’honneur de la faire marcher sous l’ombre de ses
Lys, & par son Privilege, ie me tiendray en mes vœux, clos & couvert du silence, iusques à ce que le
156
Noue’s language in this passage indicates a sincere respect for the monarch himself,
it also reveals a rather jaundiced view of the court and its minions. This attitude
helps to explain one of the few known facts about this author, which is that he was
not an écuyer du roi and appears in fact to have had no connection to the court at any
point.
229
As for La Noue’s involvement in the académie system, there is no way to
know if he was affiliated with one of the provincial institutions or not. Even if his
text specified his location, the records of the existence of noble academies, and
especially those in the provinces, are so inconsistent during the period La Noue was
active that that probably would not have been particularly enlightening. It is almost
certain, however, that La Noue taught horseback riding, even if he did not do so at an
academy: only an experienced instructor would have been able to write an
instructional manual as detailed as his text. If he did teach, then his students would
have been mostly or even entirely noble, as learning to ride, especially in the style of
the manège, was a pastime accessible only to those with the necessary wealth and
leisure to pursue it. It also is likely that La Noue trained horses on a regular basis, as
his text demonstrates a familiarity with the equine temperament that someone who
was writing from a purely theoretical perspective simply would not have. The fact
temps m’ait donné le moyen de la parfaire, & l’asseurance de la sacrifier aux pieds de son Invincible,
tres-Iuste, & tousiours triomphante Majesté, comme le plus humble & obeïssant de tous ses subjets &
serviteurs.” P. de la Noue, “Aux Cavaliers,” Cavalerie françoise et italienne.
229
This detail lends credence to Mennessier’s speculation that La Noue was Protestant; if true, that
could explain his decision to avoid the (overwhelmingly Catholic) court. Monteilhet, Maîtres de
l’œuvre équestre, 165, and Saurel, Histoire de l’équitation, 230, both suggest that La Noue may have
been a member of the Calvinist family that produced François de la Noue, well known military
commander and author of Discours politiques et militaires, but neither of them offers any support for
his supposition.
157
that La Noue does not mention in his text where or even if he taught and trained has
little significance: most of the other four authors—all of whom were affiliated with
an academy, the court, or both—also fail to clarify these details. Whether La Noue
taught and trained at an académie, at some other form of riding school, or out of his
own backyard therefore must remain an open question, but it is extremely unlikely
that he did not do so somewhere.
His significance: As can be deduced from the publication history of La
Cavalerie françoise et italienne, La Noue was and remains a relatively little known
author. His text is important, however, simply because it is one of the earliest
treatises in French on the topic of manège horsemanship. Its primary interest,
however, is the opportunity it offers us to see the perspective of a provincial
nobleman, someone who was not of that group of high ranking court nobles who
traditionally were the ones who created the new trends that ultimately trickled
outward and downward from the court and the courtiers to the provinces and the rest
of the nobility. La Noue nonetheless uses precisely the same terms as La Broue,
Pluvinel, Menou, and Delcampe—all noble riding masters affiliated with the royal
court—to describe the qualities needed by the successful horseman. This confirms
that the shifts in the nobility’s belief system about the meaning of noblesse were not
confined to the upper echelons of the order, and it counters the argument that the
textual evidence written by that select group can rarely if ever reflect the ideas of the
nobility as a collective.
158
Granted, La Noue cannot be said to represent the entire collective: not only
is he a single nobleman, but he also stands outside the “average” by virtue of the fact
that he was sufficiently well educated to write a book. On the other hand, the fact
that the beliefs of a provincial nobleman—and especially one who clearly identifies
himself in his text as different from members of the court—track so closely with the
beliefs of those same courtiers does support this study’s contention regarding the
“trickle-down effect” and its impact on the thinking of the nobility as a whole.
Because this process made it possible for changes in beliefs among the tiny minority
of nobles who were affiliated with the court gradually to spread out from the center
and down from the top to the vast majority of nobles who were not, changes in the
beliefs of the few could and did lead to changes in the beliefs of the many. The ideas
expressed in La Noue’s treatise demonstrate that, by the time he wrote it, the gradual
refashioning of the way in which noblesse was defined and understood by the
traditional nobility already had been in motion for a long enough period of time that
the changes taking place in the beliefs and behaviors of those at the top of the noble
hierarchy already had trickled down to and affected the beliefs (if not necessarily the
behaviors) of a nobleman at La Noue’s level. His manual may not have enjoyed
much success in the world of early seventeenth-century horsemanship, but it is of
particular interest in the context of a study such as this one for what it tells us of
shifting noble ideals beyond the narrow subset of the high and court nobility.
159
ANTOINE DE PLUVINEL (1552 – 1620)
His text: The publication history of Pluvinel’s text is convoluted and has led
to a certain amount of confusion. Pluvinel’s treatise appeared in two very different
versions, both of which were published several years after their purported author’s
death in 1620. An initial, textually incomplete version of Pluvinel’s teachings, Le
Maneige royal où l’on peut remarquer le defaut et la perfection du chevalier en tous
les exercices de cet art …, fait & pratiqué en l’instruction du Roy …, was published
in 1623.
230
Two years later, a second version—almost totally different as to the
text—appeared under the title L’Instruction du Roy en l’exercice de monter à
cheval….
231
The commonly received story surrounding the publication of Le Maneige
royal is that Crispian de Pas, the Flemish artist who prepared the numerous
engravings for the book, had not yet been paid for his work when Pluvinel died in
230
The full title, as it appears on the printed title page and as it is most commonly cited in the sources,
is Le Maneige royal où l’on peut remarquer le defaut et la perfection du chevalier en tous les
exercices de cet art, digne des Princes, fait & pratiqué en l’instruction du Roy, par Antoine de
Pluvinel…. Le tout gravé & representé en grandes figures de taille douce par Crispian de Pas,
flamand, à l’honneur du Roy & à la memoire de Monsieur de Pluvinel. Imprimé à Paris, aux dépens
de Crispian de Pas le vieux à Utrecht, 1624, et se vendent à Paris, chez Guillaume Le Noir, 1623.
According to Mennessier, Bibliographie hippique, s.v. Pluvinel, Antoine de, the engraved title page is
worded quite differently: Le Maneige royal … dedans lequel se void la maniere de bien dresser les
chevaux traictant de tout ce qui y est requis & necessaire pour rendre un excellent et parfaict
cavalier, le tout selon l’usage de ses academies. Embelly de plusieurs excellentes figures, faict au
naturel et gravees en taille douce par Crispin de Pas le Jeune. Le tout reveu & corrigé par l’autheur
mesme (Paris: Crispin de Pas le vieux, 1623).
231
The full title, as it appears on the printed title page and as it is most commonly cited in the sources,
is L’Instruction du Roy en l’exercice de monter à cheval, par Messire Antoine de Pluvinel…. Lequel
respondant à sa Majesté luy faict remarquer l’excellence de sa methode pour reduire les chevaux en
peu de temps à l’obeyssance des justes proportions des plus beaux airs & maneiges. Le tout enrichy
de grandes figures en taille douce, representant les vrayes & naifves actions des hommes & des
chevaux, en tous les airs, & maneiges, courses de bague, rompre en lice, au quintan, & combattre à
l’espee, ensemble les figures des brides les plus necessaires à cet usage, desseignees & gravees par
Crispian de Pas le Jeune (Paris: Michel Nivelle, 1625). This is the edition used for this study.
160
1620. De Pas subsequently obtained from Pluvinel’s former domestic servant, Jean-
Daniel Peyrol, the notes on horse training that his master had left behind. From these
fragments, a manuscript of sorts was compiled, and this counterfeit version of
Pluvinel’s teachings, illustrated with de Pas’s engravings, was published in 1623
under Pluvinel’s name and the title Le Maneige royal.
232
When this unauthorized version of Pluvinel’s thinking and methods appeared,
his close friend and disciple, René de Menou, quickly produced a second version, the
1625 Instruction du Roy. In the dedication to Louis XIII, Menou explains that, a few
months before he died, Pluvinel showed Menou the first, very rough draft of his
planned treatise on training horses and specifically asked him not to show it to
anyone in that unfinished form. When Pluvinel died unexpectedly before having had
the chance to polish his manuscript, Menou chose to honor that request and did not
publish what his mentor had given him. Once Le Maneige royal appeared, however,
Menou decided it was better to renege on his promise to his friend than to allow
Pluvinel’s methods to be presented so erroneously and inadequately. Menou
232
Both title pages (one printed, one engraved) confirm that de Pas was the engraver of the plates and
that he was financially responsible for the publication of Le Maneige royal; see n. 230, above, for the
exact wording of the titles. According to Mennessier, Bibliographie hippique, s.v. Pluvinel, Antoine
de, and Terrebasse, Pluvinel, 50-52, the front matter also includes an avertissement (foreword) signed
“J.-D. Peyrol.” Finally, the dedication in the 1625 Instruction du Roy confirms that Peyrol indeed was
Pluvinel’s former domestic servant and the source of the notes on which the text of Le Maneige royal
was based; see René de Menou, unpaginated dedication “Au Roy,” in L’Instruction du Roy, by
Pluvinel (immediately following the table of contents and preceding the “Table des Figures”).
Secondary sources that discuss the publication history of Le Maneige royal include Mennessier,
Bibliographie hippique, s.v. Pluvinel, Antoine de; Monteilhet, Maîtres de l’œuvre équestre, 226;
Saurel, Histoire de l’équitation, 227; Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 186; Terrebasse, Pluvinel, 50. The
account given by Terrebasse is without question the best researched and supported, and he is the only
author to provide any additional information on Peyrol, whose services Pluvinel valued sufficiently
that he named Peyrol in his will and arranged for him to marry his illegitimate daughter; see
Terrebasse, Pluvinel, 70-71.
161
therefore published Pluvinel’s manuscript, he claims, “in the same state in which he
put it into my hands.”
233
In both Le Maneige royal and L’Instruction du Roy, the text is in the form of
a dialog between Pluvinel and his pupil, the young Louis XIII. The premise is that
the reader is following the instruction of the king exactly as it was imparted by
Pluvinel to his student. The king’s many questions to Pluvinel permit the master to
expound on his various theories of how best to train a horse.
Despite the appearance of the supposedly definitive version of Pluvinel’s
methods in 1625, the text of the fraudulent Maneige royal was published at least
once more with a German translation printed alongside the original French text.
Between 1625 and 1706, the text of L’Instruction du Roy was published at least three
more times in French, at least twice in a French and German edition, and at least
three times again in French but now bound with Menou’s treatise, La Pratique du
233
“Monsieur de Pluvinel quelques mois auparavant de quitter ceste vie pour passer à une meilleure,
me fit la faveur de me monstrer ce que par le commandement de V.M. il avoit commencé d’escrire
touchant les principales regles de la methode qu’il tenoit pour reduire les chevaux à la parfaicte
obeïssance de l’homme: Et d’autant que ce n’estoit encore que les premiers traicts de son
imagination, lesquels il n’avoit point reveus, pretendant comme il me disoit d’y mettre bientost la
derniere main: il me pria de luy vouloir garder sans le faire voir à personne qu’il n’y eust mis l’ordre
qu’il esperoit pour le rendre digne d’estre offert à V.M. Mais (SIRE) la mort l’ayant surpris
auparavant l’execution de ce desseing ie m’estois resolu de taire ce qu’il m’avoit laissé crainte de
faillir si ie monstrois au public contre son intention un ouvrage imparfaict. Mais voyant le livre qui se
publie si esloigné du sens & de la suffisance de celuy duquel ie cheris la memoire. I’ay estime devoir
plustost manquer à la priere qu’il m’avoit faicte, que de soufrir d’avantage V.M. estre abusee. C’est
pourquoy (SIRE) ie vous offre ce que i’ay de luy en mesme estat qu’il me la mis entre les mains….”
Menou, “Au Roy,” in L’Instruction du Roy, by Pluvinel. Although Menou claims that the text of
L’Instruction du Roy is a faithful reproduction of Pluvinel’s manuscript, similarities between Menou’s
version of Pluvinel and Menou’s own publication, La Pratique du cavalier (first edition 1612, revised
and expanded edition 1650), make this claim somewhat suspect. In his preface to La Pratique du
cavalier, Menou tells his readers quite explicitly that his goal in writing his treatise is to record for
posterity the methods of his mentor, Pluvinel, rather than to set down his own ideas on the subject of
riding and training. It therefore is possible that, despite his claims to the contrary, Menou actually
composed much of L’Instruction du Roy, based on a combination of Pluvinel’s manuscript and his
own earlier exposition of Pluvinel’s ideas in La Pratique du cavalier.
162
cavalier.
234
As was the case with La Broue’s text, the precise publication details are
less important than the fact that Pluvinel’s treatise went through multiple printings
and therefore clearly was extremely popular in its time.
His background: Pluvinel was a nobleman, born in 1552 in the Dauphiné.
235
At the age of roughly seventeen, he traveled to Naples, where he spent six years
under the tutelage of the Neapolitan riding master, Gianbattista Pignatelli.
236
Pluvinel was “discovered” there by the premier écuyer of Henri III (1574-1589),
Sourdis, who had been sent to Naples on a horse-buying expedition shortly after
Henri returned to France from his short-lived tenure as King of Poland (1573-1574).
Sourdis brought Pluvinel back to France, where he entered the service of Henri III.
237
234
Mennessier and Wells cite a 1626 French-German edition of Le Maneige royal, and Wells cites a
1653 edition that Mennessier does not show. Both bibliographers cite the following editions of
L’Instruction du Roy: 1627 or 1629 (depending on which title page—engraved or printed—one
reads), 1640, and 1666 or 1668 (again depending on the title page). Wells also lists a 1646 edition
that Mennessier does not; according to her, this version appeared under the title L’Exercice de monter
à cheval. Both bibliographers list French-German editions in 1628 and 1629, and Mennessier cites
two additional books in this format, in 1640 and 1670, that Wells does not show. Mennessier and
Wells both list the following combination Pluvinel-Menou editions, all of which have been retitled:
L’Exercice de monter à cheval, 1660; L’Escuyer françois, 1671; L’Escuyer françois, 1706. Wells
lists an additional edition in this format, L’Escuyer françois, 1650. For the details on these various
publications, see Mennessier, Bibliographie hippique, s.v. Pluvinel, Antoine de; Wells,
Horsemanship: A Bibliography, s.v. Pluvinel, Antoine de.
235
Terrebasse, Pluvinel, 2, citing the Mémoire of Pluvinel’s son-in-law, confirms Pluvinel’s date and
place of birth; he then goes on at some length regarding the social status of the family, ultimately
concluding that, whatever Pluvinel’s status may have been at birth, he was universally accepted as
noble once he became an écuyer du roi (Pluvinel, 3-5, 9-10). Menou, preface, Pratique du cavalier,
also confirms Pluvinel’s noble status and place of origin; see n. 237, below, for the relevant quote.
Some sources have Pluvinel’s year of birth as 1555 rather than 1552; see, for example, Christian, Art
équestre à Paris, 56; Mennessier, Bibliographie hippique, s.v. Pluvinel, Antoine de; Monteilhet,
Maîtres de l’œuvre équestre, 226; Saurel, Histoire de l’équitation, 226. A 1555 date of birth does not,
however, coincide with the other available biographical data on Pluvinel.
236
See Terrebasse, Pluvinel, 5-6 (again citing the Mémoire) for Pluvinel’s age at the time of his
departure for Naples to study with Pignatelli. Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 30, tells us the duration of
his stay; see n. 149, above, for the full quote.
237
“[L]e Roy Henry III. … à son retour de Polongne trouvant sa grande Escurie desgarnie de bons
Chevaux, envoya en Italie Monsieur de Sourdis son premier Escuyer, pour luy en amener des plus
excellens & des mieux manians; ce qu’il fit…. Monsieur de Sourdis amena avec luy Monsieur de
163
Pluvinel served Henri III until the latter’s death in 1589. He then entered the
service of Henri IV, where he held a number of important and prestigious posts: he
was an écuyer du roi in the grande écurie; from 1604, he was qualified chevalier de
l’Ordre du Roi, gentilhomme ordinaire de la chambre, and commandant of the
grande écurie;
238
in 1606, he was named gouverneur to Henri IV’s illegitimate son,
César de Vendôme; in 1609, he was made sous-gouverneur to the Dauphin, the
Pluvinel, Gentil-homme de Dauphiné, qui pour lors estoit à l’Eschole du Seigneur Iean-Baptiste
Pignatel….” Menou, preface, Pratique du cavalier. This piece of Pluvinel’s history is the subject of
some controversy. Most sources, including the Mémoire written by Pluvinel’s own son-in-law some
forty-six years after Pluvinel’s death, maintain that Sourdis was the premier écuyer of Charles IX
(1560-1574), not Henri III; that Pluvinel came back to France and entered Henri’s service while he
was still the duc d’Anjou; that Pluvinel accompanied Anjou to Poland, where he had been elected
king, in 1573; and that Pluvinel returned with him to France in 1574, when Charles IX died and the
French crown passed to Anjou, henceforth Henri III. Terrebasse, Pluvinel, 6-8, questions the veracity
of this story, citing four contemporary documents pertaining to the trip to Poland that make no
mention of Pluvinel. The dates for other aspects of Pluvinel’s biography also do not mesh with this
tale. The story of Pluvinel’s trip to Poland therefore is almost certainly apocryphal, but it is
nonetheless tenacious; see, for example, Christian, Art équestre à Paris, 56; Dumolin, “Académies
parisiennes,” pt. 1, 419; Hoche, “Pluvinel et les académies,” 890; Mennessier, Bibliographie hippique,
s.v. Pluvinel, Antoine de; Monteilhet, Maîtres de l’œuvre équestre, 227; Nordhaus, “Arma et
Litterae,” 222; Saurel, Histoire de l’équitation, 226; Terrebasse, Pluvinel, 6-7 (here citing the
Mémoire); Watanabe-O’Kelly, “New Horses and New Horsemanship,” 77. None of these authors
cites a primary source for this information except Terrebasse, who then proceeds to debunk his source
with other, more reliable, primary materials.
238
The difference between the grande écurie and the petite écurie had little or nothing to do with size;
the former was for riding horses, the latter for carriage horses. Regarding the history of the post of
écuyer-commandant and its relationship to the posts of grand écuyer and premier écuyer, Edouard
Marie de Barthélemy, Les Grands Ecuyers de la grande écurie de France avant et depuis 1789 (Paris:
Librairie de la Société des Auteurs Dramatiques, 1868), 74, 79, 84-85, 108-110, says the following:
A 1585 ordinance regarding the duties of the grand écuyer de la grande écurie indicates that the posts
of premier écuyer and écuyer-commandant (“celui qui commande en la grande escurie”) already exist,
as functions if not as actual titles. The supreme head of both écuries was the grand écuyer, one of the
grands offices de la couronne from the reign of Henri IV. Under the grand écuyer, the head of the
grande écurie originally was called the premier écuyer de la grande écurie and the head of the petite
écurie the premier écuyer de la petite écurie. In 1642, the title of the former was changed, to avoid
the inevitable confusion between the two, to écuyer-commandant de la grande écurie. After 1642, the
head of the petite écurie was known simply as the premier écuyer. From 1582, the petite écurie was
independent of the grande in most respects, so the premier écuyer du roi had almost as much clout as
the grand écuyer. The latter was known as M. le Grand, the former as M. le Premier. At the time that
Pluvinel was given the direction of the grande écurie, his formal title may not have been écuyer-
commandant, but that was essentially the post he held. He never held, as some sources claim, the post
of grand écuyer, a position reserved to very high ranking noblemen.
164
future Louis XIII, a post in which one of his most important responsibilities was to
teach the young man to ride in a manner appropriate to his status. Pluvinel continued
to enjoy royal favor after the death of Henri IV and Louis’s ascension to the throne
in 1610. The title pages from both the 1623 Maneige royal and the 1625 Instruction
du Roy list Pluvinel’s credentials at the time of his death in 1620 as Louis XIII’s
“escuyer principal, conseiller en son conseil d’Estat, chambellan ordinaire, sous-
gouverneur de Sa Majesté.” As indicated in the previous chapter, in 1594, Pluvinel
opened the first noble académie in Paris. He died on 24 August 1620.
239
His significance: Pluvinel’s text is important for several reasons. First, it
was one of the earliest French treatises on the subject of manège horsemanship.
Second, based solely on the number of times it was reissued during the first three-
quarters of the seventeenth century, it was read by a significant number of its
intended audience in the fifty years following its initial release in 1625. Third and
far more importantly, this text reflects the beliefs of a French nobleman with close
connections to the very highest ranking noblemen of his day and, of course, to the
monarch himself. In L’Instruction du Roy, we theoretically are reading the words of
Louis XIII and the duc de Bellegarde, the grand écuyer or “Monsieur le Grand,” as
they discuss the finer points of horsemanship with Pluvinel. The plates illustrating
the treatise also indicate that Louis’s lessons were attended by numerous illustrious
courtiers: his gouverneur, M. le maréchal de Souvré, is shown in many of the
239
The information on the latter portion of Pluvinel’s life is from Hoche, “Pluvinel et les académies,”
890-891; Mennessier, Bibliographie hippique, s.v. Pluvinel, Antoine de; Terrebasse, Pluvinel, 8-13,
26-33, 45.
165
engravings, and the others include the names of various counts, barons, chevaliers,
écuyers, and noble pages of the grande écurie. Pluvinel thus was exposed on a daily
basis to the ideas and ideals of the very nobles most likely to be the genesis for
changes to the nobility’s belief system about the meaning of noblesse. Fourth,
Pluvinel was himself a nobleman of considerable rank and therefore was a conduit in
his own right for shifts in the noble ideal. Fifth, it must not be forgotten that this text
also represents the ideas of the director of the first noble académie in all of France.
By virtue of his role as a major impetus behind the spread of the type of education
that would produce the graceful and cultured gentleman who gradually was replacing
the brave but crude knight, Pluvinel was himself a part of the shift in noble identity.
What this particular author has to say about the qualities needed by the “bel & bon
homme de cheval” therefore is of extreme interest in terms of this study.
240
RENE DE MENOU (1578 – 1651)
His text: Menou’s treatise, La Pratique du cavalier par où il est enseigné la
vraye methode qu’il doit tenir pour mettre son cheval à la raison …, first appeared
240
Pluvinel’s views have captured the interest of a number of scholars, and he and his texts have been
the subject of several studies in addition to this one. Examples include Mégret-Lacan, “Naissance de
l’art équestre”; Nelson, “Antoine de Pluvinel”; Schalk, “Pluvinel”; van Orden, “Gens d’armes to
Gentilshommes,” in Raber and Tucker, Culture of the Horse; Denise Carabin, “Deux institutions de
gentilshommes sous Louis XIII: Le Gentilhomme de Pasquier et L’Instruction du Roy de Pluvinel,”
XVII
e
siècle, no. 218 (2003): 27-38. Several of these studies are marred by the authors’ reading of
vertu as a concept pertaining primarily to morality as it does today (Carabin, van Orden) or by a lack
of familiarity with the larger historical context (Carabin, Nelson), as a result of which they are able to
build arguments demonstrating philosophical influences (Carabin, van Orden) or humanist impulses
(Carabin, Nelson) in Pluvinel’s text that simply do not exist. Schalk, though he is guilty of none of
these errors and in the essay cited above has somewhat softened the position he took in Valor to
Pedigree regarding the complete jettison of virtue from seventeenth-century noble identity, still tends
to downplay the role of traditional martial vertu in Pluvinel’s text and sees his academy and others
like it far more as sites of change than as sources of continuity in noble self-perception and definition.
Mégret-Lacan provides a good analysis of Pluvinel’s text from the perspective of literary criticism
and is especially useful on the concepts of grace and sprezzatura.
166
in 1612.
241
This text was reissued, either unchanged or changed very little, at least
eight times between 1614 and 1643.
242
In 1650, a “revised, corrected, and
expanded” edition appeared, retitled La Pratique du cavalier, ou L’Exercice de
monter à cheval….
243
This is the first edition to introduce any major textual changes
from the 1612 original and is also the first one to include Menou’s treatise on the
prevention of dueling, both of which differences are noted in the “Privilege du
Roy.”
244
The revised version of Menou’s treatise also was reissued on several
occasions: between 1650 and 1706, it appeared once on its own and at least three
241
The full title of the first edition is La Pratique du cavalier par où il est enseigné la vraye methode
qu’il doit tenir pour mettre son cheval à la raison, & le rendre capable de paroistre sur la carriere,
obeïssant à l’ordre des plus justes proportions de tous les plus beaux airs & maneges … (Paris:
Veuve M. Guillemot & S. Thibout, 1612).
242
The 1612 edition was reissued, unchanged, in 1614. In 1619, the text—still as originally written—
was published in two formats, one with the addition of a treatise on breeding and veterinary matters
and one without; the version without the additional material was published again in 1620. There
follows a series of identical editions—1622, 1629, 1636, and 1643—all of which include yet another
treatise on veterinary matters. Wells has 1628 rather than 1629 for the second of these four printings;
she also shows a third 1619 and a second 1620 edition that Mennessier does not have. For further
details on these various printings, see Mennessier, Bibliographie hippique, s.v. Menou, René de;
Wells, Horsemanship: A Bibliography, s.v. Menou, René de.
243
The full title of the revised edition is La Pratique du cavalier, ou L’Exercice de monter à cheval.
Qui enseigne la methode de reduire les chevaux dans l’obeïssance des plus beaux airs & maneiges….
Reveu, corrigé et augmenté par lui-mesme [Menou]; avec les figures, pour en donner l’intelligence:
Ensemble un Traité des moyens d’empescher les duels & bannir les vices qui les causent (Paris:
Guillaume & Jean-Baptiste Loyson, 1650). This is the edition used for this study.
244
“Nostre tres-cher & bien amé René de Menou, Seigneur de Charnizay, Nous ayant fait remontrer
qu’en l’année 1614. [sic] il composa & fit imprimer un petit Livret, intitulé la Pratique du Cavalier,
lequel ayant depuis peu reveu & remarqué en iceluy beaucoup de fautes, & un nombre infiny d’autres
dans les diverses impressions qui en ont esté faites depuis la premiere, ausquelles voulant remedier; &
ayant consideré, qu’outre la correction d’icelles, qu’il pouvoit encore augmenter audit Livre plusieurs
choses tres-utiles & necessaires: Ce qu’ayant fait, & desirant le mettre au iour sous le tiltre de la
Pratique du Cavalier, ou l’Exercice de monter à cheval, reveu, corrigé & augmenté par luy mesme,
avec les Figures necessaires pour en donner l’intelligence, auquel il a joinct un petit Traité pour
empescher les Duels & bannir les vices qui les causent, s’il nous plaisoit luy accorder nos Lettres à ce
necessaires.” Unpaginated “Privilege du Roy,” in La Pratique du cavalier, by Menou (immediately
following the preface and preceding the table of contents).
167
times bound together in a single volume with Pluvinel’s 1625 Instruction du Roy.
245
Once again, the exact details are less important than the fact that Menou’s text, in
both its original and its revised forms, was reprinted more than enough times to
indicate its popularity at the time.
His background: The biographical data on Menou are scanty. He was born
in 1578 and died in 1651. The title page of his treatise identifies him as “René de
Menou, Chevalier, Seigneur de Charnizay,” and the “Privilege du Roy” confirms the
latter title, so he was not only noble but also—based on the words “chevalier” and
“seigneur,” which at the time were more than empty titles—a nobleman of at least
some standing. According to Mennessier, Menou was from Tourraine, was an
écuyer de la grande écurie under Henri IV and Louis XIII, was the gouverneur for
the duc de Mayenne, and at some point became a member of the Privy Council and
the Council of State.
246
The offices beyond simple écuyer du roi to which he was
named confirm that his status was relatively high. Finally, we know that Menou was
the friend and devoted pupil of Antoine de Pluvinel, because Menou tells us this in
the preface to his own Pratique du cavalier and then again in the dedication to Louis
XIII in Pluvinel’s Instruction du Roy, which Menou edited and had published after
his mentor’s death.
245
The 1650 edition was reissued, unchanged, in 1651; the combination edition appeared in 1660,
1671, and 1706. For further information on these last three, see n. 234, above.
246
Mennessier, Bibliographie hippique, s.v. Menou, René de. Terrebasse, Pluvinel, 52 n. 82, also lists
Menou as gouverneur to the duc de Mayenne but says Menou was an écuyer in the petite écurie rather
than the grande. Monteilhet, Maîtres de l’œuvre équestre, 199, and Saurel, Histoire de l’équitation,
230, side with Mennessier; Hoche, “Pluvinel et les académies,” 907, simply lists him as an écuyer du
roi. No sources are provided by anyone, but it is far more likely that Menou served in the grande
écurie, given both his close relationship to Pluvinel and the fact that his text concerns the training of
riding horses, not carriage horses.
168
His significance: Menou’s text is significant for precisely the same reasons
that La Broue’s and Pluvinel’s texts are significant: it was one of the earliest French
manuals of horsemanship, it was reissued multiple times over the first three-quarters
of the seventeenth century and therefore was well received by its target audience,
and it reflects the views of a nobleman who was both a participant in and an observer
of the court culture in which changing ideas about the meaning of nobility were born
and whence they spread. The 1650 edition of his treatise in particular is of interest,
because of the insights it offers on shifting notions of noble self-perception and
definition at mid-century. The revisions and additions that Menou made to the
original text of 1612 reveal some of the changes in beliefs that already have taken
root by 1650, at least among the court nobles if not throughout the noble order as a
whole. Menou’s decision to append a treatise on dueling certainly indicates that his
own thinking had shifted in the intervening years. Some of the issues that he raises
in the supplemental treatise are merely a restatement of issues raised twenty-five
years earlier in Pluvinel’s Instruction du Roy. Others, however, are wholly Menou’s
own thinking, and they corroborate the argument that this later edition of La
Pratique du cavalier reflects the mentalité of the court nobility at the mid-
seventeenth century.
169
DELCAMPE [first name unknown] (d. 1666?)
His text: Delcampe is the author of L’Art de monter à cheval …, the first
edition of which was published in 1658,
247
the second in 1664.
248
In the second
edition, both Delcampe and the anonymous author of the “Advertissement à tous
ceux qui cherissent l’exercice de monter à cheval” condemn the first edition as being
full of mistakes, omissions, and transpositions.
249
Although Delcampe’s manual
appeared only two more times between 1664 and 1690,
250
both Hoche and Dumolin
247
The full title of the first edition is L’Art de monter à cheval où il est desmontré la belle methode de
se pouvoir rendre bon homme de cheval. Ensemble les remedes les plus efficaces pour les maladies
des chevaux (Paris: Jacques le Gras, 1658). This edition was issued in two versions, one of which
includes an additional section, “De l’Excellence de l’art de monter à cheval,” and one of which does
not.
248
Full title of the second edition is L’Art de monter à cheval, qui monstre la belle & facille methode
de se rendre bon homme de cheval. Seconde édition. Augmenté d’une seconde partie, des remedes
les plus efficaces pour les maladies des chevaux … (Paris: Jacques le Gras, 1664). This edition
includes the supplemental treatise, “De l’Excellence de l’art de monter à cheval.”
249
“[M]on but … est de vous faire sçavoir que les fautes que i’ay rencontrées en l’impression [de la
premiere edition] sont en tres-grand nombre, & qu’il y a aussi outre cela quantité de transpositions,
sans qu’il ce [sic] voye aucun ordre dans la suitte des Chapitres. Et outre tout cela il y en a quantité
où il y manque des feüillets entiers, qui ont esté ou perdus ou vollez par les ennemis de l’Autheur….”
Anon., unpaginated “Advertissement à tous ceux qui cherissent l’exercice de monter à cheval,” in
L’Art de monter à cheval, by Delcampe (immediately following the dedication and preceding the table
of contents). The author goes on to say that, in the second edition, all of these problems have been
corrected. There also are several places in the body of the text where Delcampe refers to problems in
the previous edition or to things that are different about the current edition: “Mon Lecteur, ie croy
qu’il ne sera pas inutile de vous advertir du soing que i’ay pris, d’augmenter & de corriger cet œuvre,
de l’Art de monter à Cheval….” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 314; see also 265-268 passim,
where Delcampe makes several references to the fact that “en ma premiere Edition” he did not give as
much detail about certain airs above the ground. Because the second edition is more complete and
has fewer errors, it is the one used for this study.
250
The third edition had a slightly variant title: Le Noble Art de monter à cheval. Qui montre la belle
& facille methode de se rendre bon homme de cheval. Troisieme édition. Augmenté d’une seconde
partie, des remedes les plus efficaces pour les maladies des chevaux … (Paris: Jean B. Loyson, 1671).
The fourth and final edition reverted to the original title but with a slightly different subtitle: L’Art de
monter à cheval, pour elever la noblesse dans les plus beaux airs du manege. Enseignee & pratiquee
par les illustres & fameux écuyers de France, tant pour les voltes, caprioles, courbettes, passades,
sauts de terre à terre, courses de bagues; que pour tout ce que le cavalier doit sçavoir pour se rendre
habile homme de cheval. Avec les figures necessaires, & les remedes pour guerir les maladies des
chevaux. Nouvelle édition (Paris: Nicolas le Gras, 1690). Both editions include Delcampe’s “De
l’Excellence de l’art de monter à cheval.”
170
say that it was considered authoritative throughout the second half of the seventeenth
century.
251
His background: Almost nothing is known of Delcampe, not even his first
name. According to Mennessier, his dates of birth and death are unknown, but he
probably was born in the late sixteenth century, and he died at some point after 1660.
That Delcampe was an écuyer de la grande écurie du roi, as indicated on the title
page of his book, is confirmed by the appearance of his name on a 1642 payroll. We
also know that he was the director of a Parisian académie: there are references to his
school in contemporary sources,
252
and on a 1649 map of Paris, it appears as the
“Academie du Sieur Del Campo.”
253
During the 1660 entry of Louis XIV into Paris,
Delcampe was among the nobles surrounding the king’s mount and is described as
the only one of that company who had an academy, thus indicating that he was still
alive and his school continued to exist at that time.
254
The title page of L’Art de
monter à cheval as well as the 1649 map of Paris refer to him as “sieur”; between
that and his positions as a royal écuyer and the director of a noble académie, it can
be assumed that he was noble. Finally, Dumolin says that Delcampe was convicted
251
Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” pt. 2, 490; Hoche, “Pluvinel et les académies,” 914.
252
Contemporary sources that refer to Delcampe’s academy include the Journal du voyage de deux
jeunes hollandais à Paris (see n. 204, above) and Extraits des ouvrages d’Evelyn relatifs à ses
voyages en France de 1648 à 1661, in Martin Lister, Voyage de Lister à Paris en 1698 (Paris: Société
des Bibliophiles Français, 1873).
253
The spelling of his name on this document has led many authors to conclude that Delcampe was of
Spanish origin; see, for example, Mennessier, Bibliographie hippique, s.v. Delcampe; Monteilhet,
Maîtres de l’œuvre équestre, 102; Saurel, Histoire de l’équitation, 230. None of the three cites a
source for this supposition; based solely on the spelling, “Del Campo” just as easily could be Italian.
254
Except as noted in the two previous footnotes, Mennessier, Bibliographie hippique, s.v. Delcampe,
is the source for all these details on Delcampe’s life.
171
of making counterfeit money and decapitated for his crime on 16 April 1666, but he
is the only source who gives this biographical detail.
255
His significance: Delcampe’s treatise is significant for all the familiar
reasons cited for previous texts. Even in 1664, L’Art de monter à cheval still was an
early exemplar of a French manual of horsemanship. Despite the fact that, by the
date of its first appearance in 1658, it was competing against the popular and well
known treatises of La Broue, Pluvinel, and Menou, it nonetheless was sufficiently
popular in its own right to be revised and republished on three different occasions in
less than thirty-five years. Because Delcampe was an écuyer du roi, his text reflects
the views of a nobleman who was both a participant in and an observer of the court
culture in which changing ideas about the meaning of nobility were born and whence
they spread. This text also represents the ideas of a nobleman who ran a Parisian
académie when such institutions were at the height of their popularity. His role as an
écuyer-académiste made Delcampe, like Pluvinel, someone who actually helped to
shape the shift in noble identity. Finally, Delcampe’s treatise is of interest because
its date allows us to see the extent to which collective ideas about the meaning of
noblesse, at least among the court nobility, had both changed and remained the same
over the sixty years since La Broue’s Cavalerice françois of 1602-1608.
255
“Ce del Campo eut une fin tragique: convaincu de fabriquer de la fausse monnaie, il fut décapité à
la Croix du Trahoir, le 16 avril 1666.” Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” pt. 2, 490; his footnote
references Olivier Lefèvre d’Ormesson (1616-1686), Journal d’Olivier Lefèvre d’Ormesson et
extraits des Mémoires d’André Lefèvre d’Ormesson, ed. Pierre Adolphe Chéruel, 2 vols. (Paris:
Imprimerie Impériale, 1860-1861), 2:454.
172
CHAPTER 5
The Airs of the Manège Defined
An understanding of the various airs—both high and low—is necessary to
advance the argument that these movements both required and displayed many
aspects of noble vertu. Even readers who are familiar with the airs above the ground
as they are performed today (for example, by the Lipizzan stallions of the Spanish
Riding School in Vienna) quickly will realize that quite a few things have changed
since the seventeenth century. Some movements that are performed regularly today
were not performed at all in the seventeenth century; some movements that today are
considered to be airs above the ground at that time were not; one movement in
particular has the same name now that it did then but was totally different in its
execution. Even the term air poses problems: not only did it not have quite the
same meaning then that it does now, but its seventeenth-century meaning also could
differ depending on who was speaking. Guillet says:
There are trainers who take the word air in its strictest sense, to mean a
movement that is higher, slower, and more collected [écouté] than the terre à
terre, but there are others who give it a broader meaning and include in this
term the terre à terre….
256
Either way, the general meaning that emerges, both from Guillet’s definition and
from the way in which the term is used elsewhere by him and in the other sources, is
256
“Il y a des Escuyers qui prennent le mot d’air à la rigueur, pour signifier un Manége plus relevé,
plus lent, & plus écouté que le Terre à terre, Mais il y en a d’autres qui luy donnent une signification
plus estenduë, & qui sous ce mot comprennent le Terre à terre….” Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 5.
The term écouté is translated here as “collected” based on Guillet’s definition of the term: “Un pas
écouté. C’est à dire, un pas d’école, en promenant un cheval dans la main & dans les talons, un pas
raccourcy, qui écoute les talons, qui demeure balancé entre les talons …; ce qui arrive quand le cheval
prend finement les aides de la main & du talon.” Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 54. See below for
a more complete description of collection.
173
any movement that was not one of the horse’s natural gaits but something that it had
to be taught to do.
Horses used for manège equitation had three natural gaits: the walk, the trot,
and the canter. For the purposes of this study, an understanding of the mechanics of
the canter is necessary in order to comprehend some of the airs. The canter is a
three-beat gait in which one front leg and one hind leg (a diagonal pair) are on the
ground at the same time in each stride; the other two legs strike the ground
individually, resulting in an even three-beat rhythm (1-2-3, 1-2-3). If the horse is
moving to the left, the right hind foot strikes the ground first, then the left hind and
right fore together, then the left fore followed by a moment of suspension when all
four legs are briefly off the ground; when the horse does this, it is said to be
cantering on the left lead. If the horse is traveling right, the footfall is reversed: left
hind, right hind and left fore simultaneously, right fore, suspension, and the horse is
on the right lead.
All of the horse’s natural gaits may be performed with or without
“collection,” another term that plays an important role in several of the airs. When
collected, the horse must be “engaged behind,” which entails bringing its hind legs
further under its body, flexing its hocks, and lowering its haunches so that more
weight is carried by the hind legs. Engagement allows the horse to “round up,” or
raise its back, under the weight of the rider, which then allows it to arch its neck and
carry its head vertical to the ground without tension. When all these components
174
occur simultaneously, the horse is correctly collected and moves with more elevation
and suspension in its gaits.
257
The most basic of the early modern airs was the terre à terre. This
movement was similar to an extremely collected canter, but it differed from the
canter in that the front legs and the hind legs moved in two distinctly separate pairs
of steps, resulting in a broken four-beat rhythm (1-2, 3-4, 1-2, 3-4). Moving to the
left, the footfall was right hind, left hind, then right fore, left fore, with a tiny pause
between the hind pair and the front pair; moving to the right, the footfall was
reversed. There was no moment of suspension, as the front legs left the ground and
came back down before the hind legs followed. The forefeet were raised only to a
modest height—probably not much higher than in a regular collected canter—before
coming back down, and the hind feet followed with short, quick steps close to the
ground. Guillet, whose text is a dictionary of equestrian terms rather than a riding
and training manual, is the only author who defines the terre à terre.
258
The authors
of the five riding manuals make repeated references to this air but never actually
describe it.
259
According to Guillet, the terre à terre was always a lateral or two-
track movement—that is, one in which the horse traveled simultaneously forward
257
As any reader who is familiar with the principles of modern dressage will know, this is an
extremely simplified definition of collection. It is, however, sufficient for its purpose here.
258
“Le mouvement du Terre-à-terre se fait en levant à la fois les deux jambes de devant; & comme
elles sont prestes à descendre, celles de derriére les accompagnent par une cadence tride; c’est à dire,
toûjours soûtenuë, en sorte que les temps ou les mouvemens du train de derriére sont courts & vites;
ainsi le cheval estant toûjours bien ensemble, & bien assis, les jambes de devant s’elevent
médiocrement sur le Terrain, & celles de derriére sont fort basses, prés de terre, & ne font que couler;
ce qui a donné le nom de Terre-à-terre à cette sorte de Manége, parce qu’en effet le cheval s’y leve
moins haut, qu’à Courbettes.” Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 128-129.
259
This lack of description may indicate that the terre à terre was practiced so commonly at the time
these men were writing that they felt no more need to define it than to define the walk, trot, or canter.
175
and sideways, so that the hind and fore feet moved along two distinct lines or tracks,
rather than following one behind the other, on a single track.
260
Based on the way
the movement is used and described in the manuals, however, the terre à terre in fact
could be performed on either one or two tracks; in both cases, it could be ridden
straight ahead or on a bending line, such as a circle or a turn.
The first of the airs that actually involved at least part of the horse being
“above the ground” for a measurable period of time was the pesade. This air was a
highly controlled rear, in which the horse lowered its haunches, lifted its forehand
fully off the ground, tucked in its forelegs, and briefly held the pose without moving
its hind feet. The main purpose of this maneuver was to teach the horse to raise its
forehand on command, and the horse was not expected to remain in pesade for very
long before lowering its front legs back to the ground.
261
As with the terre à terre,
all the authors make frequent reference to this air; in this case, some of them do
describe it, but different authors call it different things. Menou, Pluvinel, and
Delcampe do not use the term pesade at all, but instead refer to lever le devant or
simply lever devant.
262
La Broue uses the term pesade interchangeably with both
260
“Le Terre-à-terre est une suite de sauts, fort bas, que le cheval fait en avant, estant porté de costé,
& maniant sur deux pistes.” Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 128.
261
For those familiar with the airs above the ground as they are performed today, there are several
differences between the seventeenth-century pesade and its modern counterpart, the levade. First, in
the pesade, the horse lifted its forehand to an angle of roughly forty-five degrees to the ground; in the
levade, the angle is only around thirty degrees, which requires far more strength and balance on the
part of the horse. Second, the modern movement is considered to be one of the airs above the ground
and thus an end in itself, rather than primarily a training aide for the other high airs. Third, the horse
is expected to remain in levade for as long as its strength and balance will allow, rather than only long
enough to establish the pose before coming back down.
262
See, for example, Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 47-48, 54; Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 41-42;
Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 36, 124, 143, 167, 240, 243-244.
176
lever le devant and hausser le devant, sometimes in the same passage.
263
Delcampe
occasionally uses the term posade, which was simply an alternative spelling for
pesade.
264
As for descriptions of this move (whatever the individual author chose to
call it), Guillet is once again the only one who clearly defines it.
265
La Broue and La
Noue say only that “pesades are done slowly, very high in the front, and with little
movement of the hind feet,”
266
while Menou, Pluvinel, and Delcampe all seem to
assume that the meaning of lever le devant will be self-evident to the reader with no
explanation. It is clear, however, from the way in which the movement is discussed
in the texts and from the contexts in which it is used, that all these horsemen are
talking about what this study, for the sake of simplicity, will call the pesade.
Once the horse had mastered both the terre à terre and the pesade, it could be
introduced to the courbette, which combined the other two airs. The courbette was
identical to the terre à terre in terms of footfall, but the forehand was elevated quite
a bit higher in each stride—almost but not quite as high as in a pesade. The forelegs
were supposed to remain airborne long enough for the horse to fold them fully, so
there would have been a tiny pause—a moment of suspended motion—at the top of
each stride. Once the forelegs came back down, the hind legs made the same low
263
For example, La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:145, mentions teaching the horse hausser le devant
as a prerequisite to teaching it the capriole and un pas et un saut, but further down the page he uses
pesade in the same context; on 1:148, he uses hausser le devant at the beginning of a paragraph then
pesade toward its end. In both cases, it is clear that the two terms mean the same thing.
264
Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 124, 143 (posades), 244 (pausades); for the synonymy of the
two terms, see Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 105 (s.v. “pesade”), 114 (s.v. “posade”).
265
“Pesade ou posade est l’action ou le mouvement d’un cheval, qui lors qu’il leve le devant tient les
pieds de derriére à terre sans les remuer, en telle sorte qu’il ne fait point de temps avec les hanches,
avant que de mettre les jambes de devant à terre.” Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 105.
266
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:149. P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 116, says
almost exactly the same thing.
177
hop as in the terre à terre, after which the forelegs went back up, and then so on in a
regular cadenced rhythm for as long as the horse’s strength and stamina would
permit. Like the terre à terre, the courbette could be performed on one or two
tracks, on straight or bending lines, and in varying combinations thereof.
267
Once again, all the authors of the manuals refer to the courbette repeatedly
and in a wide variety of contexts, but not all of them describe it in any detail. In this
instance, Guillet—usually so reliably detailed—gives only the basic outlines of the
movement.
268
Delcampe’s definition is vague and seems more concerned with the
precise amount of forward motion in each stride than with any actual description.
269
Pluvinel and Menou never really define it at all. About the closest Pluvinel comes is
to say that “a good courbette is when the horse does it freely, aided only by the
[rider’s] voice, whenever the rider asks for it, with the forehand and the haunches
going well together”;
270
other than this statement, which could apply to almost any
267
For those familiar with the courbette as it is performed today, it should be emphasized that the
sixteenth- and seventeenth-century movement of the same name was totally different from its modern
counterpart. In the modern courbette, the horse rears up fully and then hops forward on its hind legs
as many times as its strength and balance will permit; the forelegs never touch the ground. Some of
the confusion about the early modern movement may be the result of illustrations in contemporary
texts of the croupade, which somewhat resemble the airborne moment in the modern courbette; see
below for a full definition of the croupade.
268
“Courbettes sont des sauts d’une hauteur médiocre, que le cheval fait en portant premiérement les
deux pieds de devant en l’air, & les deux pieds de derriére suivent avec une égale cadence: en sorte
que les hanches rabattent ensemble aprés que les pieds de devant ont touché terre par des reprises
continuées & réglées.” Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 40.
269
“Les veritables courbettes, est [sic] un air tres-esgal du devant & du derriere, où il faut que le
devant s’avance de plus de quatre doigts à chaque temps, & que le derriere accompagne & suive de
mesme cadance pour gagner le mesme terrain.” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 191.
270
“[L]a bonne courbette, c’est quand le cheval la fait librement avec l’ayde seule de la langue, à
toutes les fois qu’il plaist au Chevalier de luy demander, en accompagnant bien ensemble le devant &
le derriere ….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 48. Although neither Pluvinel nor Menou ever describe
the courbette, they both mention it repeatedly; see, for example, Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 42, 46,
47, 50, 93-102 passim; Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 46-55 passim, 85-86, 91-93, 102-103. Many
other examples could be given.
178
mounted maneuver, he gives no indication what the courbette actually consists of.
Both La Broue and La Noue, in contrast, describe in significant detail exactly what
the horse must do to achieve a perfect courbette. They specifically compare the
courbette to the pesade, noting that the courbette required the horse to be
substantially more engaged behind—to bring its hind legs further under the body, to
flex its hocks more deeply, and to bear more of its weight on the hind legs—in order
both to free the forehand and to sustain the rhythm of the strides. La Broue says:
Courbettes must be lower in front, more forward, with a more active beat,
and accompanied [by the hind feet], with a steady croup, the hocks well
flexed and engaged, and the two hind feet moving together and in the same
way, advancing and gaining ground at each stride and hoof beat by a
collected motion so precise and restrained that one foot goes neither higher
nor further forward than the other. Courbettes can only be done when the
horse shifts its weight [ses forces; literally, its power] onto the haunches,
thereby freeing the forelegs and shoulders, even at the halt.
271
Both these authors also emphasize the importance of the correct motion of the hind
feet in the perfect courbette. Here La Noue:
The clear and precise beat of courbettes … does not depend on the speed and
promptness that the horse employs in bringing its front feet back to the
ground as soon as it has raised them into the air, but on the hind feet, which
271
“[L]es courbettes doivent estre plus basses de devant, plus avancées, plus prestement battuë, &
accompagnées [de derriere], avec la crouppe ferme, les jarrets accroupis & tendus, & les deux pieds
de derriere faisans leurs actions ensemble, & pareilles, en avençant & prenant terre à chaque temps &
battue, par un mouvement raccolt, si iuste & limité, que l’un ne haulse, ny advance non plus que
l’autre. Les courbettes … ne se peuvent faire, que le cheval ne ramene ses forces sur les hanches, &
par consequent, luy peuvent soulager les iambes de devant, & les espaules, mesmement à l’arrest.”
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:149. La Noue says something very similar: “[L]es courbettes sont
plus basses du devant …, mais diligemment battuës, prestement avancées & poursuyvies de la
crouppe ferme, & bien appuyée sur les iarets qu’il tient fort tendus, portant également les iambes de
derriere au ton, & à la vraye mesure d’icelles, sans que l’une ou l’autre retarde, ou avance par quelque
inegal mouvement la iuste cadance de celles de devant.” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et
italienne, 116.
179
must quickly and agilely [legerement; literally, lightly] accompany the front
ones….
272
The courbette, as well as the two less demanding airs of which it was
composed, allowed early modern French nobles to display various elements of
martial vertu. As will be shown, the demands placed on the horse were of particular
importance, because it was this unique combination of requirements that created an
environment in which the qualities of noble virtue were called into play.
The remaining airs—the croupade, the balotade, the capriole, and un pas et
un saut—were truly “above the ground”: at the height of each movement, the entire
horse was completely airborne. By far the most dramatic and difficult of the airs
relevés was the capriole. The horse first lowered its haunches and lifted its forehand
off the ground much as in the pesade. Its bent hocks then served as a sort of coiled
spring to launch the entire horse and all four of its legs into the air. At the highest
point of the leap, when the forehand and the hindquarters were at the same height,
the horse tucked in its forelegs and simultaneously lashed out with its hind legs. The
horse then dropped back to the ground in very nearly the same spot from which it
272
“[L]a nette & iuste battuë [des] courbettes … ne dépend pas de la prestesse & diligence que le
cheval employe à rabattre ses pieds de devant en terre dés aussi-tost qu’il les a élevez en l’air, mais de
ceux de derriere qui doivent legerement & promptement accompagner ceux de devant….” P. de la
Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 114. La Broue goes into even greater detail, explaining why
an overly hasty return of the front feet to the ground is undesirable: “[L]a vraye prestesse des
[courbettes] nettement rabatus ne consiste pas à la diligence que le cheval peut faire, en redonnant des
pieds de devant en terre, soudain apres les avoir haussez: car si cela estoit, il n’auroit pas le temps
suffisant pour se hausser assez de devant, ny pour bien plier les bras, qui sont deux des plus belles
actions faictes ensemble, en tous les airs relevez. Mais le vray & plus beau son du iuste rebat se fait,
quand les pieds de derriere accompaignent bien & legerement, & qu’ils respondent promptement à
ceux de devant, les rehaussant soudain qu’ils donnent en terre.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois,
1:150.
180
began.
273
The remaining high airs were derivatives or variations of the capriole.
The croupade was identical, except that the horse did not lash out with its hind legs
at the highest point of the leap but kept them fully curled under its body. The
balotade also was identical to the capriole, except that at the highest point of the leap
the horse again did not lash out with its hind legs but moved them back only far
enough to show its hind shoes.
274
Un pas et un saut alternated a courbette (the pas,
or step) and a capriole (the saut, or jump). This air was considered less taxing than
the capriole, because the pas phase allowed the horse a brief recovery period before
it was asked for another capriole.
275
273
The early modern capriole was virtually identical to the modern movement, except that the early
modern horse was expected to furnish as many successive caprioles as its strength would permit,
whereas today caprioles always are performed individually, with a period of recovery between
attempts if more than one is to be made.
274
For contemporary descriptions of the croupade and the balotade, see P. de la Noue, Cavalerie
françoise et italienne, 124, 125; Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 150-151; Delcampe, Art de monter à
cheval, 192-193; Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 15 (s.v. “balotade”), 44-45 (s.v. “croupade”). La
Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:140, says that the croupade and the balotade are the same thing but
never defines either movement. La Noue also considers the croupade and the balotade to be the same
movement (Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 112) and uses the terms interchangeably; he does not
differentiate between the horse showing its hind shoes and not showing them but merely stipulates
that the movement differs from the capriole in that the horse “retrousse ses iambes de derriere sous le
ventre” (Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 124). Although Menou gives distinct descriptions for the
two movements, he too says that “toutefois & l’un & l’autre se nomment balotades” (Pratique du
cavalier, 151) and elsewhere in his text himself refers to them as “une mesme chose” (Pratique du
cavalier, 112). Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 278, also differentiates clearly between the two but
agrees that, despite their differences, “on les confond souvent l’un avec l’autre.” Pluvinel, Instruction
du Roy, 15, 51, does mention both movements but never describes either of them.
275
For contemporary descriptions of un pas et un saut, see La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:145-146,
1:169, 1:171; P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 138; Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 139;
Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 147; Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 195-196, 266-267; Guillet, Arts
de l’homme d’épée, 100. There is a bit of disagreement concerning the pas phase of this movement.
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:171, says that the pas should not be a regular courbette but “un
temps de galop r’accourcy … comme les courbettes de demy-air, mais plus avancé & determiné &
moins relevé”—in other words, something closer to a stride of terre à terre. P. de la Noue, Cavalerie
françoise et italienne, 138, says virtually the same thing about the pas; it should be “un temps de
galop … plus avancé & determiné, mais moins relevé que celuy des courbettes de mezair.” Menou,
Pratique du cavalier, 147, says only that the pas should be “une courbette fort basse.” According to
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 139, in contrast, un pas et un saut actually consists of three movements:
181
Since these last four movements were all essentially variations on the
capriole, this study will focus on the latter. In contrast to the terre à terre, the
pesade, and the courbette, the capriole is described by all six horsemen in
considerable detail.
276
The primary distinction of this air was the full and forceful
extension of the hind legs at the height of the movement: all six authors emphasize
that the horse must ruer or éparer (kick or lash out with its hind legs), fully and as
hard as it can. Delcampe specifies that it should do so with such abandon that it
appears as if it wants to tear itself apart, while Pluvinel and Menou stipulate that the
hind legs should thrust with such force that the hock joints crack.
277
This aspect of
the capriole was in fact so important that it had its own verb: noüer l’éguillette.
278
La Broue, La Noue, and Guillet also emphasize that, for the capriole to be truly
perfect, the horse must return to the ground in almost the same spot whence it took
a stride of terre à terre (which he identifies as the pas phase), then a stride of courbette, then a
capriole “fort haute.” Like Pluvinel, Delcampe sees this movement as having three distinct phases
and prefers to call it “l’air de deux temps, & un sault” (Art de monter à cheval, 196). He says that this
air “est composé d’une capriole, d’une courbette fort basse, avec un mediocre temps ou pas” (Art de
monter à cheval, 266), although he does not specify the precise contours of the pas. Delcampe states
that there are various names for this movement: “les uns l’appellent le pas, le sault; les autres disent
deux pas, le sault; aucuns veulent dire un pas, une courbette, & un sault” (Art de monter à cheval,
196). Despite the semantic differences, it is clear that he considers all these names to refer to the
same combination of moves. Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 100, in contrast, gives distinct
definitions for un pas et un saut and deux pas et un saut. The former is simply alternating courbettes
and caprioles, whereas the latter is not three distinctly different movements but “un Manége ou un air
composé de deux Courbetes, terminées par une capriole.”
276
For contemporary descriptions of the capriole, see La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:168; P. de la
Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 135; Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 118-119; Menou, Pratique
du cavalier, 114; Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 193; Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 30.
277
All of them comment on this in their descriptions of this movement (see previous note); Pluvinel,
Menou, and Delcampe are just particularly colorful.
278
“Noüer l’éguillette. C’est quand un cheval sauteur s’épare, & rue entiérement du train de derriere,
alongeant les deux jambes également & de toute leur estenduë.” Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 55.
182
off.
279
Menou and Pluvinel mention that the horse must be “dans la main et dans les
talons”—what today would be called “on the aids,” or receptive to the actions of the
rider’s hands and legs.
280
La Broue and La Noue are the only ones to take the
description yet further. They say much the same things; here La Broue is speaking:
To perform a perfect capriole, the horse must lift the forehand and the
haunches to an equal height: that is, when it kicks out, the top of the croup
and the withers should be at the same level. Its head and mouth must make
no evasive movement, either when going up, kicking out, or coming down
from the jump; instead, its head must always be straight and steady. When
the forehand is raised, the forelegs must be fully and equally folded; when
kicking out, the hocks must be fully and forcefully extended, and the hind
feet must not move apart from each other even the slightest bit but must stay
together at the same height and with the same action, making their thrust in
the air gaily and at one time. The tail must be steady, and after each leap the
horse ordinarily must land within one-and-a-half or two feet from the place
whence it began the jump.
281
Finally—and perhaps most astoundingly given the demands of the movement—it is
clear from the way in which the authors describe the capriole elsewhere in their texts
279
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:168, 1:169; P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 112,
130, 132, 135; Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 30 (s.v. “capriole”), 122 (s.v. “sauteur”).
280
“Les vrayes & bonnes capreoles ne sont autre chose que des saults que fait le cheval à temps dans
la main & dans les tallons, se laissant soustenir de l’un, & ayder de l’autre….” Pluvinel, Instruction
du Roy, 118. Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 114, says the same thing.
281
“Pour faire la capriole en sa perfection, il faut que le cheval, leve le devant & le derriere d’esgale
hauteur: Assavoir que quand il esparera le milieu, & la cyme de la crouppe, & le garrot, soyent
haucéz au niveau l’un de l’autre: que la teste, ny la bouche, ne facent aucun mouvement esgaré, en
haussant le devant, en esparant, ou à la descente du saut: mais que le front soit tousiours droit &
ferme: que tant que le devant se haussera, les bras soient bien & également pliez: qu’en esparant, les
jarrets s’estendent nerveusement, & que les deux pieds de derriere, ne s’escartent tant soit peu: mais
que voisins de mesme hauteur, & de pareille action, ils facent gaillardement & en temps leur reict en
l’air. Que la queuë soit asseuree: & que le cheval retombe à tous les coups ordinairement à un pied,
& demy ou deux pieds pres du lieu qu’il se sera haussé pour faire le saut.” La Broue, Cavalerice
françois, 1:168. Similarly, La Noue says: “La capriole se connoist estre en sa perfection, quand le
cheval est en l’air aussi haut élevé du derriere, que du devant, qu’il est ferme & droit de teste, & de
col, aussi bien en reprenant terre, qu’en se levant, & éparant sans aucun faux mouvement; qu’il
retrousse également les bras en se haussant, & nouë nerveusement l’éguillette en éparant, sans que les
jambes du derriere s’écartent tant soit peu l’une de l’autre, faisant également & en mesme temps leur
action en l’air, & quand il retombe tousiours de saut en saut à un pied & demy, ou deux pres du lieu
où il se sera haussé sans ioüer aucunement de la queuë.” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et
italienne, 135.
183
that the horse was expected to perform more than one at a time. Although they all
make similar statements, Pluvinel is perhaps the most succinct. After describing
how to teach the horse to perform first one and then two or three caprioles, he
concludes: “In this fashion …, one will get the horse to do as many caprioles as its
strength and its wind will permit.”
282
This air, more than any other, was a vehicle for early modern French nobles
to display not just their vertu but also and simultaneously their grace and
sprezzatura. As the description above indicates, the capriole was an extremely
difficult and demanding movement. What was required of the horse in order to
perform it, and thus of the rider in order to cue the horse to do so and then stay in
saddle while it did, created an ideal platform for the display of both familiar and
emerging attributes of noble identity.
Although any of the airs described above could be used to make the same
points, the pesade, the terre à terre, the courbette, and the capriole illustrate them
282
“De cette façon …, on portera le cheval à faire autant de capreoles, que sa force & son haleine le
pourront permettre.” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 129. For additional explicit statements that the
horse is expected to perform more than one capriole at a time, see La Broue, Cavalerice françois,
1:160, 1:167; P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 124, 130, 134-135; Pluvinel, Instruction
du Roy, 118-119, 135; Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 114; Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 253-
255, 256-258. The five trainers also say that this movement can be performed on a volte (a small
circle), which obviously would require more than a single jump in order to form the figure; see La
Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:166, 1:167; P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 124;
Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 114; Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 118, 135-138; Delcampe, Art de
monter à cheval, 193-194, 256-258. In these passages, Menou, Pluvinel, and Delcampe also maintain
that caprioles may be performed going forward or sideways. In all cases, the motion—be it forward,
sideways, or in a circle—appears to have taken place in between the actual caprioles, since the quality
of the air itself was judged in part on the horse landing nearly in the same place it took off. La Noue,
for example, describes the training process for the capriole on the volte as follows: “[L]e Cavalier …
haussera [le cheval], & luy fera faire un [sic] ou deux caprioles …, & puis marchera deux ou trois pas
sur la mesme piste de la volte, apres lesquels il le relevera de mesme air … & le portera tousiours sur
cette volte composée & entremeslée de pas, & de caprioles, iusques à ce qu’il l’ait faite, & serrée …,
sans interrompre la mesure de son air.” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 134-135.
184
particularly well. The courbette and the capriole were both considered to be true
airs relevés and to represent opposite extremes in terms of difficulty for the horse.
The terre à terre and the pesade, although not technically airs above the ground,
were prerequisites to the courbette, and the three movements form a “set.” The
pesade also was considered to be a stepping stone not just to the courbette but to all
the high airs. Finally, the capriole was the most difficult of the airs above the
ground and therefore encompasses all the others that were similar to it but less
strenuous for the horse: any horse capable of performing the capriole automatically
would have been capable of performing the croupade, the balotade, or un pas et un
saut.
185
PART 3: CONTINUITY
As discussed in Chapter One, during the second half of the sixteenth century,
the meaning and centrality of martial vertu as a defining quality of noblesse were
being threatened from various directions. The decline of heavy cavalry, an
inevitable result of changes in the conduct of war, led to a decline in opportunities
for noblemen to demonstrate vertu in its customary context. The rise of a new
category of nobility, whose status was based on virtues that had nothing to do with
military skills, challenged the way in which the traditional nobility defined vertu.
Some members of this new category of nobility also questioned the validity of any
type of virtue as a defining quality of noblesse if that virtue was not personally
demonstrated during the lifetime of the nobleman in question.
As explained in Chapter Two, the traditional French nobility’s response to
these threats was gradual, non-linear, multifaceted, and largely unconscious, and it
affected the various subcategories of the nobility in different ways and at different
times. The shift in noble self-perception and definition with which this study is
concerned was only one facet—albeit a very important facet—of that response, and
it, too, was subject to all the caveats just listed. The one common thread that runs
throughout the gradual refashioning of noble identity during this period is the
presence of continuities among all the changes. As this study argues, the
longstanding noble attribute of horsemanship is a particularly illuminating example
of that phenomenon. Part Three of this study focuses on the continuities in noble
186
self-perception and definition that were facilitated by manège equitation in general
and the airs relevés in particular.
Even though manège equitation and the airs above the ground were “new”
behaviors in the sense that they represented a specific type of horsemanship that the
French nobles had not practiced prior to the sixteenth century, they were at the same
time merely the continuation of the very old noble behavior of horsemanship in its
broader sense—a behavior which, as already shown, was intimately related to both
military service and martial virtue, and therefore to noble status itself. Because of
this underlying continuity, it was possible for the apparently new behavior of manège
horsemanship to be permeated with old beliefs about the meaning of noblesse. The
horsemanship of the manège was appealing to French nobles of this period at least in
part because it offered them the opportunity to display many of the cherished and
familiar personal characteristics associated with martial vertu. The presence of these
old ideas allowed the traditional nobles to continue to demonstrate and validate their
nobility in ways that made sense to them, thus providing them with a transitional
“comfort zone” as they slowly refashioned their self-perception and definition. At
the same time, the modification of the mounted style through which those familiar
beliefs were manifested and the shift to the new and nonmilitary context in which
they were displayed also opened up a space in which change became possible.
Horsemanship thus was uniquely suited to facilitate the nobles’ adaptive process in a
way that did not violate their existing belief system.
187
CHAPTER 6
Vertu and Manège Equitation
Since manège equitation involved complex maneuvers not dissimilar to
ballet, at first glance this type of horsemanship might seem to be a far better vehicle
for a nobleman to flaunt his grace and sprezzatura than for him to display the
qualities comprising vertu—qualities such as courage, boldness, strength, judgment,
foresight, resolve, resourcefulness, and inventiveness. However, while it certainly is
true that manège equitation was considered to be an excellent showcase for a
nobleman’s more courtly attributes, because it was performed on a powerful and
often unpredictable beast, it was equally likely to call on the qualities associated with
virtue. The authors of the manuals of horsemanship make repeated reference to
certain qualities required by the successful horseman, many of which were essential
components of martial vertu precisely as the nobles had been defining it for
centuries. These texts thus reveal how the nobility unconsciously manipulated the
longstanding attribute of horsemanship to create a space in which traditional martial
virtue could continue to play a role in its self-perception and definition, despite all
the apparent evidence to the contrary.
As discussed in Chapter One, the central component of noble vertu was valor,
and one of the most fundamental components of valor was courage, or the
willingness to face danger boldly and without hesitation. The descriptions in the
manuals of both the various types of equine resistance to learning the movements of
the manège and the various methods for correcting those resistances make it
188
abundantly clear that riding is a perilous business and should not be attempted by the
timid or the fearful. Although some movements obviously will have more innate
potential than others to end in severe injury or even death, virtually any mounted
activity is at least somewhat hazardous, so every rider at some point will have to face
a situation that may prove dangerous. The sources all reflect this basic fact of
horsemanship with their frequent references to the perils inherent in riding and
training large, strong, and highly temperamental animals that may or may not wish to
cooperate. Pluvinel opens his text with a general statement on this issue by
comparing the risks of learning to ride with the safety of book-learning:
All the arts and sciences that men address via reason are learned at rest,
without any torment, agitation, or apprehension whatsoever, since they are
permitted, whether in the presence or the absence of their teacher, to study in
private that which their master has taught them, without being disturbed by
anything at all. But in horseback riding, it is not the same, because a man can
learn this only by mounting a horse and resolving himself to endure all the
extravagances that can be expected of an irrational animal, the perils that are
to be encountered amidst the rage, despair, and cowardice of such animals, as
well as the fear of feeling the effects thereof.
283
Several authors point out that the dangers associated with horsemanship
begin even before one is in the saddle. Pluvinel warns that one should never
approach a horse straight on, from either the front or the back, as this may startle the
horse into striking the rider with one or both of its forefeet or kicking him with one
283
“[T]outes les sciences, & les arts que les hommes traittent par raison, ils les apprennent en repos,
sans aucun tourment, agitation, ny apprehension quelconque: Leur estant permis, soit en la presence,
ou en l’absence de celuy qui les enseigne, d’estudier en leur particulier ce que leur maistre leur aura
enseigne, sans estre inquietez de quoy que ce soit. Mais en l’exercice de la Cavalerie, il n’en est pas
de mesmes: car l’homme ne le peut apprendre, qu’en montant sur un cheval, duquel il faut qu’il se
resolve de souffrir toutes les extravagances que se peuvent attendre d’un animal irraisonnable, les
perils qui se rencontrent parmy la cholere, le desespoir, & la lascheté de tels animaux, iointe aux
apprehensions d’en ressentir les effects.” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 2-3. Menou, Pratique du
cavalier, 18, says virtually the same thing.
189
or both of its hind feet.
284
La Broue, in his discussion of how to teach the horse to
stand still while being mounted, cautions against several potentially hazardous
behaviors: the horse that rears up to strike with its front feet, the one that kicks out
with its hind feet, or the one that tries to bite the rider or his assistant.
285
Menou also
mentions the possible dangers of mounting and suggests putting blinkers (lunettes)
on the horse that wants to strike or jump on the person trying to mount it.
286
Several
authors also draw attention to the special risks of working with the untrained or
“green” horse. La Noue discusses breaking the colt to saddle and the wild behavior
and violent maneuvers the trainer can expect to encounter during that process.
Pluvinel and Menou repeatedly mention the increased perils—of getting hurt, even
of getting killed—the rider must face when schooling a green horse, all of whose
instincts are telling it to rid itself by whatever means possible of the unfamiliar
presence on its back.
287
284
Here Pluvinel is addressing Louis XIII: “Lors donc [que sa Majesté] voudra s’en approcher, elle
prendra … garde, que ce ne soit pas tout droict, par-devant, de crainte qu’un cheval ou fascheux ou
gaillard ne luy donnast d’un ou des deux pieds de devant. Il ne faut pas aussi que ce soit par derriere
de peur de mesme accident.” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 73. Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 35,
agains says virtually the same thing. This piece of advice is as valid now as it was then: because of
the way in which the horse’s eyes are situated in its head, it has a blind spot directly in front of and
directly behind it. If something (e.g., a person) materializes abruptly out of that blind spot right next
to the horse, its fight-or-flight instinct may well be activated, causing it to shy violently or, if it is
being held and cannot run away, to defend itself with its teeth or feet.
285
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:49, mentions the following possible behaviors on the part of the
horse when it is being taught to stand still at the mounting block: “il se dresse contre le Cavalerice
pour le frapper des pieds de devant”; “il se veut defendre à coups de pied en tirant quantité de ruades”;
“il les voulut mordre, ou frapper” (referring here both to the rider who is attempting to mount and to
his assistant who is holding the horse).
286
“[S]i le Cheval estoit vicieux, & qu’il voulust frapper l’homme du pied de devant, & se ietter sur
luy, il luy faudra mettre des lunettes, & luy faire obeyr avec.” Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 31.
287
P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 10-13; Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 15-16, 17, 26,
38-39; Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 32, 61, 72. Pluvinel and Menou both mention the particular
hazard of putting a green rider on a green horse—yet another piece of advice that still holds true
today.
190
Most of the trainers, however, reserve the bulk of their warnings to the
routine act of riding a schooled horse, thus underscoring the fact that riding is in and
of itself a hazardous activity and therefore requires courage on the part of those who
wish to engage in it. Menou says bluntly that “it is almost impossible to prevent the
rider from … frequently being imperiled….”
288
This is because of the various
dangerous things that horses are prone to do, particularly when asked to perform
some action or movement that clashes with their natural temperament. La Broue, for
example, discusses the hazards of training several common variations on the horse
that does not move off the rider’s leg as it should. The cheval retif is a malicious and
rebellious horse that resists the leg and refuses to go forward, stopping short or even
backing up instead of doing so.
289
The ramingue is a more extreme version of the
retif: it is totally resistant to the leg, refuses to go forward, balks and resists with
malicious intent when spurred, and may back up, buck, kick, or any combination
thereof in order to evade the spurs.
290
The chatoüilleux is similar to the ramingue in
its initial behavior, but the reason for its resistance is different: rather than refusing
288
“[I]l est presque impossible d’empescher que l’homme … souvent ne soit en peril….” Menou,
Pratique du cavalier, 73.
289
Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 120, defines the retif as follows: “Cheval rétif, malicieux, rebelle,
qui demeure tout court, qui veut aller oú il luy plaist, & quand il luy plaist.” See also DAF, s.v.
“retif”: “Retif … qui s’arrête, ou qui recule au lieu d’avancer. Il ne se dit au propre, que Des chevaux
ou autres bêtes de monture….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 35, says simply that “le retif … reffuse
d’aller en avant.”
290
For the ramingue, Guillet offers the following descriptions: “[L]e Ramingue recule, saute, & ruë
pour ne pas obéïr aux esperons …” (Arts de l’homme d’épée, 35, s.v. “chatouilleux”). “Cheval
ramingue est une espéce de retif, qui résiste aux esperons, qui s’attache aux éperons; c’est à dire, qui
se deffend avec malice contre les éperons, & double quelque fois des reins, & ruë le plus souvent,
pour ne pas obéïr” (Arts de l’homme d’épée, 118, s.v. “ramingue”). “Le Ramingue tient du rétif”
(Arts de l’homme d’épée, 120, s.v. “retif”). See also DAF, s.v. “ramingue”: “Ramingue … se dit du
cheval qui résiste à l’éperon, qui se roidit quand il en est atteint, & qui refuse de se porter alors en
avant.”
191
to move forward because of a fundamentally malicious and rebellious nature, it
resists because it is too sensitive to the spurs. Once the rider recognizes this key
distinction and cues the horse with the back of his leg rather than with his spur, the
chatoüilleux becomes obedient.
291
Regarding the hazards of training these various types, La Broue warns that
horses that are retifs, ramingues, or chatoüilleux, and especially those that are
malicious as well, may bite the feet or legs of the rider or reach up with a hind foot
and strike his heel; they may try to scrape the rider’s knees and legs against the wall;
they may run away with the rider or try to unload him with awkward or ungainly
leaps or jumps (“faire quelque saut disgratié, en intention de mettre le … chevalier
par terre”); if all else fails, they may simply lie down on the ground! And if, in
addition to all the other qualities already named, they are obstinate and vindictive,
they may resort to bucking continuously and as hard as they can until they are
exhausted.
292
On the other hand, if the horse is retif in combination with a different
set of characteristics or is simply too sensitive to the bit, one can expect something
else entirely:
Those [horses] that have an overly sensitive and spoiled [mouth] will rear to
the point that they are in danger of going over backward, risking the life of
their rider; and those that have a moderate [mouth] but are nonetheless hot-
291
Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 35, defines the chatoüilleux thusly: “Cheval chatoüilleux est
celuy qui, pour estre trop fin d’esperon & trop sensible, ne fuit pas franchement les esperons; mais y
résiste en quelque maniére, se jettant dessus lors qu’on les approche du poil pour le pincer. Les
chevaux chatoüilleux ont quelque chose des Ramingues, exceptè que le Ramingue recule, saute, & ruë
pour ne pas obéïr aux esperons, & le chatoüilleux y rèsiste quelque temps; mais en suitte il obéït, & va
beaucoup mieux par la peur d’un jarret vigoureux, lors qu’il sent le Cavalier estendre la jambe, qu’il
ne va par le coup-mesme.”
292
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:60, 1:62, 1:83; see also 1:53 on the behavior of horses enraged by
bad training.
192
tempered, quick to react, sensitive, and resistant to legs and spurs, will lower
their heads, almost putting their nose between their legs, and will back up, or
bite the calves or feet of their rider, and sometimes even bite themselves out
of rage and spite.
293
In contrast to La Broue, Pluvinel and Menou seem to have had less trouble
with horses that refused to go forward than with horses that were overly anxious to
do so. To describe the horses whose behaviors pose the greatest danger to the rider,
they use adjectives such as vigorous, full of fire, hot-tempered, quick to react,
sensitive, and impatient, and they emphasize that such horses are especially likely to
get impatient or even desperate if they are pushed too hard or forced to do something
for which they have not been properly prepared. In the latter case, the fault
obviously lies with the rider, but that does not obviate the possibility that he may be
harmed as a result of the horse’s response to his poor judgment. Both Menou and
Pluvinel make vague but threatening references to unspecified accidents, injuries,
dangers, and hazards the rider may experience because of the horse’s (also
293
“[C]eux qui l’auront trop sensible & esgaree, se cabreront, en danger de se renverser, au hazard de
la vie de celuy qui sera dessus: & ceux qui l’auront temperee, & qui neantmoins seront coleres,
sensibles & fingards, baisseront la teste, mettans presque le nez entre les iambes pour reculer, ou pour
mordre les greves, ou les pieds du Cavalerice, & quelquefois se mordront eux-mesmes de colere & de
despit.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:79. According to Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 70,
fingart is a “vieille expression, pour dire un cheval Ramingue.” As for colere, this term is used quite
frequently as an adjective to describe a horse, although it also is used (as in the passage just cited) as a
noun; in the latter case, the word means essentially the same thing that it does in modern usage, i.e.,
anger or rage. When it appears as an adjective, it generally is a reference to choler, one of the four
bodily humors. While choleric can mean angry, it also can mean hot-tempered, quick-tempered,
quick to react, easily irritated, etc. When the authors of the manuals use colere in reference to equine
temperament, translating it as “angry” rarely makes much sense, so this study translates the term as
“hot-tempered and quick to react.” Essentially, a colere horse is what today simply would be called
“hot.” See pp. 200-201, below, for more on the four humors in relation to horses.
193
unspecified) “desordres,” “extrémes meschancetez,” “coups de desespoir,” or “tours
hazardeux.”
294
In addition to these dark but generic warnings, they talk about specific
behaviors that can occur with specific types of horses. Pluvinel tells us, for example:
There are horses … that are so hot-tempered, quick to react, impatient, fiery,
disobedient, sensitive, and so bereft of the memory needed to retain good
[things] that they usually enter into such despair that they dash all over the
place, heedless of whatever peril there may be, without comprehending
anything whatsoever.
295
Speaking of horses that are simultaneously hot-tempered, quick to react, impatient,
and nasty or vicious (meschant), Menou says:
A horse of this temperament, … almost does not want to tolerate a rider [and
does so] only with extreme impatience…. There is no one who can make me
believe that, in putting a rider up, … [this horse] will not make him run the
risk of hurting himself…. It is to be feared that, in doing some desperate
maneuver, it may fall or go over backward, as is sometimes seen with those
of this temperament; and when it does not resort to these extremely malicious
acts, it may nonetheless resist with a thousand tricks with its back and its
rhythm [tours d’esquine, & de contre-temps], throwing itself hither and yon
in order to discomfit its rider…. One will find horses of this nature, … [that]
have maimed several men….
296
294
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 29, 52, 123, 132, 144; Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 113, 116, 137,
154. Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 34, says something similar: a horse that feels too restricted
(contraint & sujet; literally, constrained and subjugated) when it is put between the pillars may react
with “quelque desordre” and injure its rider.
295
“Il y a des chevaux … qui sont si coleres, impatiens, pleins de feu, si ennemis de l’obeïssance, si
sensibles, & avec si peu de memoire à retenir le bien, que le plus souvent ils entrent en de tels
desespoirs, qu’ils se precipitent par tout quelque peril qu’il y ayt, sans apprehender quoy que ce soit.”
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 113-114.
296
“[U]n Cheval de cette humeur, … presque ne veut soufrir l’homme sur luy qu’avec impatience
extréme…. Il n’y a personne qui me puisse faire croire, que mettant un homme dessus … qu’il ne luy
fasse courre fortune de se blesser…. Il est à craindre qu’en faisant quelque coup de desespere il ne
tombe ou se renverse, comme il s’en voit bien quelques-uns de cette humeur; & quand il ne prendra
ces extrémes meschancetez, il se pourra neantmoins deffendre de mille tours d’esquine, & de contre-
temps, se jettant deçà & delà pour incommoder son homme…. [S]e trouvera Cheval de cette nature,
… [qui] aura estropié plusieurs hommes….” Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 59-60.
194
Both trainers have similar passages on the risks of making too many demands
on a horse that is too heavy (pesant) and that needs to be “lightened.” Based on the
way in which these terms are used in the manuals, coupled with Guillet’s definitions
for peser à la main and leger à la main, what Menou and Pluvinel mean here is a
horse that is what today would be called heavy on the forehand: a horse that is
insufficiently engaged behind, that carries too much of its weight over the forelegs,
and that therefore leans on—or is heavy in—the rider’s hand. Such a horse indeed
needs to be lightened, or taught to carry itself in a more balanced fashion, with better
engagement and more weight over the haunches, so that it is correctly collected—a
fundamental prerequisite for all manège movements, both high and low.
297
Speaking
of the cheval pesant, Pluvinel warns:
If, with the heaviness, there also is malice, one must be very careful not to
push it before having lightened it, for fear of this unpleasant accident: if
pushed before being lightened, it will resist due to its malice; this malice
being seconded by neither strength nor lightness, there is a risk that the horse,
being so attached to the ground because of its heaviness and seeing that it
cannot resist with its strength, will be obliged to hurl itself to the ground or, if
it tries to buck and rear, being aided by neither strength nor lightness, to fall
or to go over backward or sometimes to lie down.
298
297
For Guillet’s definition of the horse that is leger à la main, see n. 352, below; on the heavy horse,
Guillet says: “Cheval qui pése à la main; c’est à dire, qui par la molesse de son encolure, par la
faiblesse de ses reins, par la pésanteur de son train de devant, ou par lassitude s’abandonne sur la
bride, sans faire pourtant aucun effort pour forcer la main du Cavalier.” Guillet then gives the
following example of usage for the term, which confirms that correcting this problem entails engaging
the hind legs and shifting the weight to the haunches: “Vostre cheval à trop d’appuy, & pése à la
main, trottés-le sous luy; c’est à dire, mettés-le sur les hanches….” Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée,
105 (s.v. “peser à la main”).
298
“Si le cheval est pesant …, il est besoin de le fort alegerir …: mais si parmy la pesanteur il s’y
rencontroit de la malice, il faudroit bien prendre garde de le presser auparavant que de l’avoir
allegery, crainte de l’accident … fascheux, qui est que le pressant avant que d’estre allegery, il ne
manqueroit pas de se deffendre de sa malice, laquelle n’estant pas second[ée] de force, ny de legereté,
il y auroit hazard que le cheval estant attache à terre, à cause de sa pesanteur, cela l’obligeast voyant
qu’il ne se pourroit deffendre de sa force, de se jetter contre terre, ou taschant de faire quelques eslans,
n’estant assisté de force ny de legereté, tomber ou se renverser ou quelquesfois se coucher.” Pluvinel,
195
La Broue, Pluvinel, and Menou all make reference to horses falling or going
over backward. The former can happen at any time, but—unless the horse is moving
at high speed—this usually is less catastrophic than it appears to observers: falling
with one’s horse is not pleasant, but in most cases both parties walk away from it
relatively unscathed. Going over backward, on the other hand, is something no rider
wants to experience. This generally happens as a result of a horse rearing so high
that it loses its balance; if it actually goes straight over onto its back with the rider
still in the saddle, it does not take any sophisticated equestrian knowledge to realize
that a rider crushed under half a ton or more of falling equine is unlikely to emerge
alive, let alone unhurt. Even if the rider manages to fling himself free of the horse
before it goes over, falling from the height of a horse standing straight up on its hind
legs still may result in serious injury. As La Broue points out below, however, it is
fairly unusual for a horse to go straight over backward, so riders rarely will need to
worry about getting crushed or about having to jump off from great heights. In his
opinion, the greater danger in fact lies in coming off a horse that falls while
galloping:
If the fast horse falls while running, as sometimes can happen as a result of
weak legs, then the rider’s life is in much greater danger than if the horse
went over backward or fell in some other way: for if it falls while rearing, it
usually turns to one side or the other while still in the air, so it does not fall
flat on its back, unless the rider is hanging onto the reins so hard that he
prevents the horse from making this sideways action. But when [a horse]
falls while galloping at full speed, it is with such a precipitous disorder and
Instruction du Roy, 32-33. Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 64, has a very similar passage, although he
ends his by stipulating that the horse does all these things specifically “pour se deffaire de son
homme.”
196
with such great violence that neither horse nor rider has the time or the means
to help themselves in any fashion whatsoever, and thus the danger in this case
is much more to be feared.
299
Given all the hazards inherent in simply climbing aboard a horse, riders
clearly need to be brave and bold; based solely on the descriptions just cited of some
common equine misbehaviors, they also would benefit from generous amounts of
purely physical strength and vigor. La Broue says quite specifically that, in order to
master so proud and vigorous a creature as a horse, the rider must be strong and
courageous.
300
Pluvinel, in discussing his approach to teaching his students,
emphasizes the importance of both boldness (hardiesse) and lack of fear.
301
All the
authors of these texts are quick to point out, however, that training a horse to perform
the more demanding airs—both low and high—requires far more of the rider than
just physical strength and the capacity to face danger without flinching. When these
authors describe the various types of resistance and evasion a horse might offer, they
repeatedly emphasize the intellectual side of riding and training, which requires the
rider to deploy the more “cerebral” aspects of his vertu.
299
“[S]i le cheval viste tombe en courant, comme il advient aucunesfois par la debilité des membres,
celuy qui est dessus, est en beaucoup plus grand hazard de sa vie, que si le cheval se renversoit, ou
prenoit quelque autre cheute: car s’il tombe en se cabrant, il se tourne d’ordinaire, d’un costé ou
d’autre, estant encores en l’air, tellement que la cheute en arriere, ne se fait pas tout à plat sur le dos,
si ce n’est que le chevalier se tienne tant attaché à la bride, qu’il oste le moyen au cheval de faire ceste
action de costé. Mais quand il tombe en courant à toute bride, c’est avec un desordre precipité, par
une si grande violence, que le cheval ny l’homme n’ont loisir ny commodité de s’aider en façon
quelconque, & partant le danger en est plus à craindre.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:130.
300
“[P]our bien maistriser un animal si vigoureux & si fier, le Cavalerice doit estre naturellement
ingenieux, patient, courageux & fort.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:3.
301
“[I]e laisse quelquesfois gourmander & battre un cheval sans raison à un escolier que ie cognois
manquer de resolution, afin qu’il prenne de la hardiesse: car apres on corrige sans difficulté les
deffauts qui arrivent par trop de resolution, & bien plus aisément que ceux qui sont causez par trop de
crainte….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 82.
197
Part of the reason these horsemen stressed the intellectual qualities needed by
the rider was because of the way in which they had come to view the nature of the
horse at the time they authored their respective texts. Based on the evidence of
manuals of horsemanship written in the second half of the sixteenth century, the
horse previously had been viewed as an irrational force of nature to be dominated
and subdued by rational human will and intelligence. These texts are filled with
extremely harsh and sometimes frankly abusive methods for handling the horse that
fails to obey, based on the belief that horses were incapable of fear, confusion, or
uncertainty, and that they therefore disobeyed solely out of stubbornness. By the end
of the sixteenth century, the way in which the horse was viewed had begun to shift.
In manuals of horsemanship written from the 1590s onward, we rarely see training
techniques that would be considered excessive today, and we no longer read that the
horse should be bludgeoned or terrorized into obeying. The authors of these treatises
no longer see horses as wholly irrational creatures that must be brutally forced into
obedience but as creatures capable of being persuaded to obey—or even to cooperate
voluntarily—through the use of gentler methods.
302
When this new perspective on the nature of the horse is taken into
consideration, it becomes considerably easier to understand why the authors of the
manuals used in this study repeatedly emphasize the intellectual side of riding and
training rather than the purely physical side. While there is no question that
302
For additional details on the shift in how sixteenth- and seventeenth-century horsemen viewed the
nature of the horse, see especially Le Guin, “Man and Horse in Harmony,” in Raber and Tucker,
Culture of the Horse; also Cuneo, “Just a Bit of Control,” in Raber and Tucker, Culture of the Horse;
Raber, “Reasonable Creatures.”
198
contemporary horsemen needed a good set of leg muscles simply to retain their seats
during the more extravagant airs relevés, in a contest of pure strength, the horse
always has the advantage. In a contest of pure reason, on the other hand, the rider
retains the upper hand. Because of these disparities, the rider must rely on his
superior mental capacities to achieve his desired ends, carefully manipulating the
horse’s limited intelligence so that its greater physical power can be channeled in a
profitable direction.
Riding and training such an animal—one whose vastly superior size and
strength, and thus its potential to injure or even kill its handler, is contained solely by
a mind that at any moment may descend into fear and confusion—has more
commonalities with participating in a military campaign than might be thought.
Both activities require someone who can combine skill, knowledge, experience,
judgment, foresight, determination, resourcefulness, patience, and creativity in ways
that create order out of unpredictability and who is physically, mentally, and
emotionally flexible enough to move quickly and easily from established and
familiar routine to disorder, uncertainty, confusion, and back again, all without
losing his cool. Both activities, in other words, require the more cerebral qualities of
traditional noble vertu.
Just as the successful military man has to be familiar with and well versed in
all aspects of his profession, so the successful horseman has to have an extraordinary
level of skill and knowledge in all aspects of riding and training. His first step is to
familiarize himself thoroughly with the tools of his trade—in this case, the horse
199
itself. He must know all the possible variations in equine types: their different
temperaments, their conformational traits, and the capacities and limitations, both
mental and physical, that are likely to result from these differences in nature and
structure. At the time that the authors of the manuals were writing, breeds as we
know them today did not yet exist, so at least the horseman of this period was spared
the need to know all of these details as they pertained to individual breeds. Although
some of the authors do write of specific kinds of horses—the Turk, the Barb, the
cheval d’Espagne—in a way that would imply a breed, there was as yet no formal
method for keeping track of pedigrees and thus for ensuring, for example, that a
given Spanish horse had anything much in common with another Spanish horse,
other than that they both (purportedly) came from Spain. When the authors say that
the horseman must be familiar with “all sorts of horses,” they therefore are referring
to the various types of equine temperament.
All the authors discuss different variations on that theme, usually in
relationship to the appropriate training technique for a given temperament. Menou,
for example, offers a list of five types of horse that will benefit from being worked
between the pillars: the hot-tempered, impatient, spiteful horse; the light, kind,
good-natured horse; the lazy, lethargic horse; the heavy, malicious horse; and the
horse that is (literally) “desperate of mouth” (desesperé de bouche)—not all that
surprising a trait, given the severity of many of the bits of the period.
303
Numerous
303
“[T]outes sortes de Chevaux se peuvent metre au pillier sans hazard, & qu’en tous il en peut reüssir
de bons effects, le colere impatient & plein de meschanceté, le leger, gentil & de bonne nature, le
lasche & paresseux, le pesant & malicieux, le desesperé de bouche….” Menou, Pratique du cavalier,
200
other examples of training methods targeted at specific equine types follow below.
Delcampe discusses the nature of the horse, not in relation to training techniques but
in the context of the four elements and the four bodily humors: earth, water, air, and
fire, and choler (or red or yellow bile), melancholy (or black bile), phlegm, and
blood. The latter are of particular interest because all the authors employ the term
colere to describe the temperament of the horse, and La Broue and La Noue, like
Delcampe, also use the terms melancolique, flegmatique, and sanguin.
Delcampe attributes variations in the horse’s temperament to its relationship
to the elements and especially to the character traits commonly associated with the
humors. According to late medieval science and medicine, those qualities are as
follows: the choleric is graceful but angry, hot-tempered, and quick to react; the
melancholy is sad, depressed, and possibly mentally ill or insane; the phlegmatic is
lazy, slow-moving, apathetic, and stupid; the sanguine is easy-going, agreeable,
pleasant, and warm.
304
The 1694 edition of the Dictionnaire de l’Académie
Française generally concurs: choler refers to someone who is prone to lose his
58. Based on the way the treatises use the term, desesperé de bouche refers to a horse whose mouth
was so sensitive that the action of the bit was a physical torment, so the horse may very well have
been in a state of despair. According to DAF, the verb desesperer in fact can mean “tourmenter,
donner tant de peine à une personne qu’elle ne sçait plus que faire.” This is not the place to go into a
lengthy sidebar on the topic of bits and bitting, either then or now, but finding a bit that fits the
individual horse’s mouth properly—i.e., that does not make the animal desesperé de bouche—can be
extremely challenging if the horse has, for example, a small mouth, thin lips, a low palate, a large
tongue, and so on. Given that all manège horses were ridden in some form of curb bit, the available
options for such horses would have considerably less than they are today and the potential for
problems correspondingly greater.
304
On the humors and their attributes, see W. F. Bynum, E. J. Browne, and Roy Porter, eds.,
Dictionary of the History of Science (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1981), 191-192;
Colin A. Ronan, Science: Its History and Development Among the World’s Cultures (New York:
Facts on File, 1982), 93; Nancy G. Sirasi, Medieval and Early Renaissance Medicine: An Introduction
to Knowledge and Practice (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990), 104-106; Elspeth Whitney,
Medieval Science and Technology (Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2004), 74, 96-98.
201
temper; melancholy is associated with sorrow and sadness; phlegm corresponds to an
indifferent, sluggish, stolid nature; and sanguine means someone of gay
temperament.
305
Delcampe’s list of equine natures agrees fairly closely with these
definitions; he says:
It is fairly likely that the humor and temperament of the horse, like its quality,
depends from the four Elements, and conforms most to that to which it
pertains most. For example, if [the horse] derives from the earth more than
from the others, it will be glum, heavy, melancholy, of little heart, and
usually … with no fire…. If it pertains to water, it will be phlegmatic, slow
to develop, sluggish, lethargic, and insensitive to the spurs…. If it derives
from air, it will be sanguine, prompt, lively, and agile in its movements…. If
it derives from fire, it will be hot-tempered, light on its feet, fiery, and
naturally gifted for the airs above the ground, without, however, having much
strength or vigor….
306
Once the horseman has mastered all the possible permutations of the equine
temperament, he then has to learn all the methods and techniques for training the
variant types of horses at all the different stages of the educational process. He must
be aware of all the possible types of resistance or evasion that the various equine
types are likely to offer in response to each of these methods and techniques, and he
must have at his disposal all the corrective measures that might be needed to
305
DAF, s.v.v. “colere,” “melancolie,” “phlegme,” and “sanguin.”
306
“Il est assez probable que l’humeur & le temperament du cheval, comme sa qualité dépend des
quatre Elements, & se conforme plus avec celuy duquel il participe davantage; par exemple, s’il tient
de la terre plus que des autres, il sera morne, pesant, melancholique, & de peu de cœur, & pour
l’ordinaire … sans aucun feu…. S’il participe de l’eau, il sera phlegmatique, tardif, lent, mol, & peu
d’esperon…. S’il tient plus de l’air, il sera sanguin, prompt, gaillard, & agille en ses mouvemens….
S’il tient plus du feu, il sera colere, leger, ardent & sauteur, sans toutesfois avoir beaucoup de force &
de nerf….” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 295-297.
202
counteract these responses. As La Noue quite rightly points out, “a single remedy
cannot cure several different maladies….”
307
Having armed himself with this fund of skills and knowledge, the rider then
must combine them with many of the other qualities of noble vertu. All the texts
stress that, in order for the rider to successfully govern his mount, his skill,
knowledge, and experience must be joined to attributes such as sound judgment,
prudence, wisdom, foresight, discretion, resolve, patience, ingenuity, inventiveness,
the ability to adapt to constantly changing circumstances, and—perhaps most
importantly—the ability to deploy all these virtues quickly, coolly, and accurately
while in potentially precarious circumstances, since the very fact of being mounted
on an unpredictable animal allows the rider no time for studied contemplation of his
next move.
All the authors place particular emphasis on the importance of judgment,
since so many of the other aspects of virtue required its involvement in order to be
used to their fullest advantage. For example, no matter how much knowledge the
trainer may have of equine types, training methods, evasions, and corrections, it will
be of little use if he cannot put it into practice. Having mastered all the requisite
theory, the aspiring horseman therefore must apply his judgment to each individual
307
“[U]n seul remede ne peut guarir plusieurs differentes maladies….” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie
françoise et italienne, 65. Elsewhere La Noue expands on this concept, in this case referring
specifically to schooling the recently broken colt: “[L]e Cavalcadour qui n’auroit qu’un seul moyen
de s’asseurer de son poulain se trouveroit le plus souvent décheu de son esperance, & bravé de celuy
qu’il pretendoit manier à baguette [to ride with an iron hand?]; & pour ce sujet faut-il qu’il soit
pourveu d’autant d’inventions qu’il en sera de ruses & malices, à fin d’avoir recours en temps & lieu à
celle qu’il connoistra estre la plus expediente pour le reduire à son devoir….” P. de la Noue,
Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 23.
203
horse he rides, in order to determine its temperament and how that temperament
combines with the horse’s conformation to either enhance or limit its potential to
perform a given task well. Once he has made that initial assessment, the trainer must
again apply his judgment when choosing which training approach best matches his
mount’s inherent strengths and weaknesses, both mental and physical.
Of course, even the most perfect match between mount and method will not
always produce the desired results: horses are not machines, and they do not always
cooperate with the rider’s designs. As the training process progresses, the horseman
therefore is faced with endless instances that require yet more judgment calls. If he
asks for a given movement and his horse fails to produce it, the trainer must ascertain
why that particular horse is responding in that particular way to that particular
request at that particular moment. Is it resisting because the request conflicts with its
fundamental nature? Is it unable to comply because the request is simply beyond its
capacity, either mental or physical? Is it failing to obey because it is frightened or
confused, either too tired or too full of energy, or perhaps unfamiliar with the task in
question? Or is it misbehaving out of sheer spite and a malicious desire to prevent
its rider from achieving his goal? Once he has discerned the cause of the horse’s
response, the trainer must once again employ his judgment, coupled with his
knowledge and experience, to choose from his repertoire the appropriate technique to
counteract his horse’s behavior and then apply it promptly.
308
In order to be
308
On this issue, Pluvinel says: “[I]l est bien necessaire de cognoistre si la defence vient de malice,
d’ignorance, de gayeté, ou de manque de memoire: afin d’y remedier selon cette cognoissance, qui ne
se peut acquerir que par le long usage dans l’exercice….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 99-100.
204
effective, in fact, all this always must happen virtually instantaneously and
sometimes must happen while the horse is engaging in wild behaviors that threaten
to unseat the rider or worse.
There are so many examples in the manuals of horsemanship illustrating the
statements in the previous four paragraphs that it is difficult to choose among them.
For example, the emphasis on the importance of judgment in virtually every context
forms a steady drumbeat throughout the treatises, as evidenced by the following
quotes from each of the five authors. “To tactfully train and adjust the horse in all
the airs and maneges that are practiced in the best schools of this time, it is …
necessary for the rider to have much natural judgment….” “Not all horses are suited
for the airs relevez, and it requires much judgment and experience to recognize those
that, in addition to their [natural] inclination, have enough power to succeed in
them….” “Whosoever knows how to work with perfect judgment and knowledge of
the best moment to undertake that which is necessary can resolve and adjust his
horse’s head and entire body in all sorts of airs, by practicing the lessons above and
below with patience, skill, and judgment.” “The horse … [is] capable of obedience
in everything, if the rider work[s] with patience, judgment, and resolve….” “It is
absolutely necessary that the rider possess sufficient talent in his métier, and that he
also have enough knowledge, judgment, and accuracy to be able to execute it on
horseback.”
309
309
The quotes given in the text are, respectively: “Et pour dresser & adiuster delicatement le cheval à
tous les airs & maneges, qui se pratiquent aux meilleures escoles de ce temps, il est aussi necessaire
que le Cavalerice aye beaucoup de iugement naturel….” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:3. “Tous
205
As can be seen from the excerpts above, the relationship between the trainer’s
judgment and his knowledge and experience is of central importance. He could
know every possible trick of the trade, but without the prudence, wisdom, and
discernment—in other words, the good judgment—to recognize when and why those
tricks should be applied, he certainly would not get very far. Pluvinel, Menou, and
Delcampe all run through a list of such “trade secrets,” ending with the reminder that
it is only by applying them at the appropriate time and place that the rider will
achieve his goals. Here Menou is speaking:
Carefully seeking out all sorts of means to make [the horse] understand
promptly what the rider is asking of it, whether in a courteous manner, or
with gentleness, or by surprising [the horse], or by switching locations when
necessary, or by gaining its obedience through frequent changes in its work,
sometimes between the pillars, sometimes with its head to the wall,
sometimes in a corner or down the length of the games course or a nice,
straight pathway; and using all the various movements of his hands, the bit
and bridle, the cavesson, his weight and seat, the aids of his thighs, legs, and
heels, the various types of whip; bringing into play all of these resources
when his judgment tells him they will be most timely: there is no doubt that
[the rider] will get any horse whatsoever to do as he wishes….
310
chevaux ne sont pas propres aux airs relevez, & … y va-il beaucoup de jugement & d’experience pour
reconnoistre ceux qui outre leur inclination auront assez de force pour y bien reüssir….” P. de la
Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 111. “[Q]uiconque sçaura travailler avec iugement, &
cognoissance parfaicte, de ce qu’il faut entreprendre bien à propos, peut resoudre & ajuster la teste de
son cheval, & tout le reste du corps de toutes sortes d’airs, en pratiquant les leçons susdites, & les
suivantes, avec patience, industrie & iugement.” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 36. “[L]e Cheval …
estoit capable d’obeyr à tout, si le Cavalier travailloit avec patience, iugement & resolution….”
Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 152. “[I]l est absolument necessaire que le Cavalier possede assez de
talent en son mestier, & qu’il aye assez de science, de iugement & de iustesse pour le pouvoir faire
executer au cheval.” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 55. Regarding the translation of “industrie”
as “skill” in the Pluvinel quote, in early modern French usage, the term industrie meant skill or
dexterity rather than the modern meaning of diligence, or an action characterized by steady, earnest
application or effort; see DAF, s.v. “industrie.”
310
“[R]echerchant soigneusement toutes sortes de moyens pour luy faire concevoir promptement ce
qu’il luy demande, soit par courtoisie, soit par douceur, soit par surprise, soit en changeant de place où
il seroit besoin, soit en gagnant l’obeyssance par le frequent changement de leçons, tantost entre les
deux pilliers, tantost la teste à la muraille, tantost dans une encoigneure ou le long d’une carriere ou
allée bien droite; & ainsi se servant de tous ces moyens, des divers mouvemens de la main, de la
bride, du caveçon, des contrepoids du corps, des aydes des cuisses, des jambes, des talons, de la gaule,
206
Recognizing the right time and place to employ a given technique is
intimately linked to the rider’s ability to assess the capacities and limitations, both
physical and mental, of his mount. Here, too, there is a persistent drumbeat
throughout the manuals about the importance of knowing one’s horse so that one
may choose—wisely, prudently, judiciously—the appropriate training technique. “I
have pointed out … the principle rules and leave it to the wise and prudent rider to
use them as they are needed, with modesty and the judgment he will make of his
horse, either to lengthen, shorten, or change its lessons, as he knows it to be
necessary….” “It is up to the rider to probe the innermost workings of the nature of
various [horses], in order to treat all of them according to their particular merits….”
“I leave it to the discretion of the discriminating rider … to judiciously vary [his
horses’] schooling, as he knows them to be either obedient or resistant to the hand.”
“The rider must conform the actions of his body and the movements of his hands to
the contact with his horse’s mouth, and the aids of his legs and spurs—based on [his
horse’s] natural inclination, vigor, and lightness—to the general movement of all its
parts….”
311
No matter how well versed the horseman may be in the methods and
des bastons & du poinson, faisant joüer tous ces ressorts selon les temps que le iugement dictera: Il
est sans doute qu’on gagnera sur tel Cheval que ce soit ce que l’on en desire.…” Menou, Pratique du
cavalier, 138-139. Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 133, and Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 252-
253, say very similar things.
311
The quotes given in the text are, respectively: “I’en ay fait remarquer … les principales reigles, &
laisse au prudent & sage Cavalier d’en user selon le besoin, avec la modestie & le iugement qu’il fera
de son cheval, pour luy allonger, accourcir, ou changer ses leçons, comme il cognoistra estre
necessaire….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 83. “[C]’est au Cavalier de sonder bien au vif, ce que
c’est que du naturel des uns & des autres, pour les traitter tous en particulier selon leurs merites …”;
“[I]e laisse à la discretion du judicieux Cavalerice … de leur varier judicieusement le manege selon
qu’il les y connoistra entiers & obeïssants”; “[I]l faut que le Cavalier conforme les actions de son
207
techniques for training the horse, “they will bring him success only to the extent that
he knows and can arrange his horse’s nature and strengths,” which then will allow
him to apply his knowledge and skill “appropriately and tactfully … in their proper
and necessary time and place.”
312
Pluvinel is particularly concise on the relationship between the trainer’s
knowledge of and experience with all the different types of horses and all the
possible training techniques, his judgment, his assessment of a given horse, and his
decisions regarding that horse’s training program:
In order to be a perfect horseman, it is necessary to know, in both theory and
practice, how to train all sorts of horses in all sorts of airs and maneges. [It is
necessary to know] their strengths, their inclinations, their habits, their
perfections and imperfections, and their natures in their entirety and to
exercise one’s judgment over all of that in order to discern for what a horse
may be best suited, so as to undertake nothing on it than it will not be able to
do with grace.
313
corps, & les temps de sa main à l’appuy de la bouche de son cheval; & l’aide des iambes, & des
éperons selon sa naturelle inclination, vigueur, & legeresse au mouvement general de toutes ses
parties….” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 60, 65, 138, respectively.
312
The quote in its entirety reads: “[L]’homme de cheval doit iuger, qu’il ne se peut bonnement
prevaloir des bons effects de pas une des … plus iustes leçons, sans avoir bien pratiqué toutes les
autres, & en general qu’elles ne luy peuvent non plus bien reüssir, si ce n’est en tant qu’il y sçait, &
selon qu’il y peut disposer le naturel, & les forces du cheval: & encores toutes ces choses ne suffiront
pas à la perfection des plus belles reigles, si celuy qui en usera n’a l’esprit curieux & patient, & si tous
ces mouvemens ne sont si subtils, & temperez que par leur fermesse & diligence, toutes les
proportions desdites reigles, soient iustement & delicatement observees en leurs temps & lieux
propres & necessaires.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 2:163. Elsewhere, La Broue makes similar
remarks, but specifically in the context of correcting a horse’s misbehavior: “[E]n donnant un grand
chastiment, le bon Cavalerice doit avoir tousiours l’esprit tendu, à bien recognoistre à quoy le cheval
se dispose, durant le tourment merité, afin de continuer, augmenter, diminuer, (ou à la necessité) du
tout cesser la rigueur, selon qu’il iugera les divers mouvemens, qui se feront en la nature & au
courage de son cheval….” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 2:158.
313
“[P]our estre parfaictement bon homme à cheval, il faut sçavoir par practique & par raison, la
maniere de dresser toutes sortes de chevaux à toutes sortes d’airs & de maneges: leurs forces, leurs
inclinations, leurs habitudes, leurs perfections & imperfections, & leur nature entierement. Sur tout
cela faire agir le iugement pour sçavoir à quoy le cheval peut estre propre, afin de n’entreprendre sur
luy que ce qu’il pourra executer de bonne grace.” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 9-10.
208
La Broue is even more explicit than Pluvinel, as well as considerably more detailed.
He places even more emphasis on the importance of matching the training technique
to the individual horse, not just in terms of its nature and capacity in general but also
in terms of a whole series of variables—its mood, its energy level, even when and
what it last ate—that can change from day to day:
It is necessary that he who is a good master in this profession be skillful and
wise; that he know, from his erudite and inquisitive practical experience, the
complexions, inclinations, and strengths of the horse, of whatever nation and
temperament it be; that, by the keen reasoning and experience of the art [of
horsemanship], he know how to choose the exercise that will be most
appropriate to the nature of that [horse]; that he always adjust and match his
lessons, punishments, and rewards to the horse’s consent, strength, and
memory, or to its malice, disobedience, and obstinacy, without ever letting
himself get carried away, either by anger or by unreasonable expectations.
For it is true ignorance to not know how to unobtrusively take advantage …
of that which can be found in the strength and disposition of the horse; and [it
is] temerity to undertake and to want to obtain that which must be
[undertaken and obtained] only by the good reasons and true means of the
art…. The good master must also have the judgment and discretion to
increase and decrease the exercise, aids, and corrections according to what he
knows of the horse’s nourishment, spirit, memory, experience, disposition,
and wind, in order to keep it always in a good state, well schooled, consistent
in its movements, and usually as obedient as it is lively and round in the back
[en esquine], or particularly [to do] more or less according to whether he
finds it in a good or bad mood and whether its disposition is solid and strong
or proceeds solely from lightness and liveliness.
314
314
“Il faut donc que celuy, qui est bon maistre en ceste profession, soit industrieux & sage, & qu’il
cognoisse par une docte & curieuse pratique, les complexion [sic], inclination [sic], & forces du
cheval, de quelque nation, & temperament qu’il soit, & que par les vives raisons & l’experience de
l’art, il sçache choisir l’exercice, qui sera plus propre au naturel d’iceluy: que tousiours il reigle &
proportionne ces leçons, chastimens & caresse [sic], au consentement, au pouvoir & à la memoire, ou
à la malice, desobeyssance & obstination du cheval, sans iamais se laisser transporter à la colere ny
aux desirs desmesurez: car c’est proprement ignorance, de ne se sçavoir discrettement prevaloir … de
ce qui se peut trouver aux forces, & disposition du cheval: & temerité d’entreprendre & d’en vouloir
tirer ce qui ne se doit que par les bonnes raisons & vrais moyens de l’art…. La bonne [sic] maistre
doit aussi avoir le iugement, & la discretion de croistre & diminuer l’exercice, les aydes &
chastimens, selon qu’il cognoistra que le cheval se fortifiera de nourriture, de courage, de memoire, de
pratique, de disposition & d’haleine, afin de le maintenir tousiours en bon estat, en bonne escole, en
egalité de l’air, de son manege, & communément autant en obeyssance, qu’en esquine & gaillardise:
ou en particulier plus ou moins, selon qu’il se trouvera de bonne ou mauvaise fantaisie, & que sa
209
Although all of the authors address these interrelated issues, La Broue and
Pluvinel do so in the greatest detail, often specifying very precisely the best training
technique to employ with a particular type of horse. For example, La Broue offers
the following general advice:
One must use great patience when dealing with horses that are hot-tempered
and quick to react but also sanguine, keeping them more fearful than
submissive, because, given that they are naturally sensitive and apprehensive,
the more restrictive remedies and punishments can discourage and torment
them. For those that are hot-tempered, quick to react, and aduste,
315
when
working them one again must observe much discretion as well as dispatch, in
order to distract them from their bad impressions before they engage in
disorderly behaviors that could be avoided, because usually they are timid
and malicious, and as a result gentleness and caresses fail to reduce them to
obedience, while harsh schooling often renders them abject. When pursuing
those that are short-tempered but also phlegmatic, it is necessary to use short,
easy lessons, frequently repeated in various different places, as much because
they are generally weaker of memory than other types as because they have
neither much strength nor much spirit. Although ordinarily sanguine but
melancholy horses are more patient and less malicious than those whose
natures are otherwise composed, when working them one must usually
maintain a wisely judged middle ground between gentle and harsh schooling
methods, in order to always preserve their talent and good inclinations.
316
disposition sera solide & nerveuse, ou procedente seulement d’allegresse, & de legereté.” La Broue,
Cavalerice françois, 2:173-174.
315
The meaning of aduste in this particular context is unclear; it may mean unruly, wild, or extremely
difficult to control. According to DAF, s.v. “aduste,” the term means that which is burnt (bruslé) and
is said only of the bodily humors. La Broue and La Noue are the only authors to employ the term; La
Noue uses it solely to modify the humor colere, and La Broue usually uses it that way as well, which
does not tell us much if anything about its meaning. La Broue also uses it, however, to describe
equine behaviors that are “viles, ou adustes & malicieuses,” thus indicating that, whatever it meant, it
was not a desirable trait. DAF, s.v. “bruslé,” offers a figurative definition as “possedé d’une violente
passion, en être ardemment épris,” which certainly could apply to a horse that also was vil and
malicieux, but begs the question why La Broue used aduste rather than bruslé. Guillet offers no
definition for the term, so it was not part of the common contemporary equestrian lexicon.
316
“On doit user d’une grande patience, ayant affaires aux chevaux coleres sanguins, les tenans plus
en crainte qu’en subiection, parce que d’autant qu’ils sont naturellement sensible & apprehensifs, les
remedes & chastimens plus contraints, les peuvent rebuter & desesperer: & à ceux qui sont coleres,
adustes, il faut aussi observer en leur exercice beaucoup de discretion, & de diligence pour les divertir
de leurs mauvaise [sic] impressions, premier qu’ils facent les desordres qui se peuvent eviter: parce
que communément ils sont timides & malicieux, & par consequent la douceur & les caresses, ne les
reduisent pas à l’obeyssance, & la rigueur de l’escole les avilist souvent: & en recherchant ceux qui
210
Finally, when attempting to reschool the debauched, confused, and discouraged
horse, La Broue says that the trainer must be knowledgeable and experienced enough
to determine what offended and confused it in the first place, so that he then can
select the types of exercises that will both reassure it and divert its attention from
whatever has made it so dislike manège work.
317
In many cases, these two horsemen go one step further and discuss the
methods and correctives to be used with various equine types in very specific
situations. In the passage paraphrased below, for example, Pluvinel is speaking of
the initial stages of the horse’s training, when it is being worked without a rider in a
large circle with a stationary pillar at its center. The horse is wearing a type of
headstall called a cavesson, which has no bit and controls the horse via pressure on
its nose rather than its mouth. The cavesson is attached to the pillar by a long rope,
and the trainer stands in the center of the circle, next to the pillar, where he can cue
the horse with his voice, a whip, or both.
318
Even at this very basic level of
sont coleres flegmatiques, il est necessaire d’user de leçons courtes, faciles, & souvent refaictes en
divers & differens lieux, tant à cause qu’ils sont ordinairement plus foibles de memoire que les autres,
que parce qu’ils n’ont pas beaucoup de force ny de courage: & quoy que d’ordinaire les sanguins
melancoliques, soyent plus patients, & moins malicieux que ceux qui de leur nature, sont autrement
composez, il faut aussi en les exerçant, garder communément une mediocrité sagement iugée, entre la
douceur & la rigueur de l’escole afin de conserver tousiours leur facilité & bonne inclination.” La
Broue, Cavalerice françois, 2:8.
317
“[I]l n’appartient qu’aux plus sages & excellens maistres, de bien repatrier & remettre les chevaux
desbauchez, confus & rebutez: car il ne faut pas seulement qu’ils en recognoissent les humeurs &
complexions naturelles; mais aussi que par aucuns deportemens & indices, ils iugent tout ce qui les
peut avoir trop offensez, & confondus, & qu’ils les sçachent exercer, & r’asseurer par des reigles &
remedes propres à les divertir des soupçons qui leur fait hayr l’escole.” La Broue, Cavalerice
françois, 2:125.
318
This is very similar to the modern training technique of longeing, the only major difference being
that today, largely for the sake of safety, the trainer replaces the pillar, standing in the center of the
circle and holding the longe line in one hand and a longe whip in the other.
211
schooling, Pluvinel emphasizes the importance of choosing the approach that best
corresponds to the nature of the horse in question, stressing that, “if … some horse
refuses to obey, the prudent horseman must consider what is preventing it from
doing so.”
319
When working with a hot-tempered, impatient, malicious horse, Pluvinel says
that the trainer first must consider whether the horse moves forward willingly or
whether it balks or even backs up when asked to do so. In the first case, the trainer
should refrain from hitting the horse, no matter what naughty thing it does, since the
restriction imposed by the rope attached to the horse’s cavesson will provide
sufficient punishment without his intervention: the horse literally will punish itself if
it misbehaves. If, on the other hand, the restriction of the cavesson causes the horse
to halt and perhaps to back up or even throw itself against the pillar, then the trainer
should give it a sharp smack with the whip and should continue to do so until the
horse stops resisting and goes forward.
If the horse refuses to obey because it is lazy and lethargic, then the trainer
should not hesitate to use the whip as vigorously as necessary. He should, however,
be as sparing with his blows as possible. Beating the horse should be a last resort,
used only for the most extreme misbehavior, such as when it attempts to harm its
trainer. If the horse has a bad mouth, generally it will resist not by refusing to move
forward but by leaning on the bit and pulling on the rider’s hands. Since it already is
going forward, this horse should not be whipped; instead, it needs to be held in check
319
“Si … quelque cheval refuse d’obeyr, il faut que le prudent Chevalier considere ce qui l’en
empesche.” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 31.
212
while its haunches are engaged, which will lighten its forehand and thus obviate its
need to lean on the bit. According to Pluvinel, this goal easily may be achieved by
working the horse around the pillar in a cavesson, although he does not indicate how
or why. If the horse is so heavy on the forehand that it cannot perform at all, then it
must be vigorously encouraged to engage its haunches. This must happen before the
horse can be asked to do much else, since pushing it while it is still on its forehand
will only make it more so, which eventually will get to the point that the problem
will become extremely difficult to fix. And if, in addition to being on its forehand,
this horse also is malicious, then the trainer must be doubly careful not to ask for too
much too soon: otherwise, the malice may combine with the lack of balance to make
the horse fall or even throw itself to the ground.
320
La Broue also offers an example from the early stages of the horse’s training,
although in his example the horse already is under saddle. Here he is speaking of the
practice of trotting young horses that are heavy on the forehand over rough ground in
order to encourage them to pick up their feet:
I strongly approve of this remedy and consider it necessary, but only when it
is done with good judgment. If done without judgment, as is seen fairly
often, it is wrong and detrimental. It therefore is necessary that the rider first
consider if this heaviness or sluggishness of the [horse’s] shoulders or legs
originates in a lack of spirit, strength, or natural suppleness, or is the result of
having been insufficiently or improperly schooled or worked too hard.
321
320
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 31-33.
321
“I’approuve fort ce remede, & le tiens pour necessaire, quand il est bien iugé. Mais estant fait sans
iugement, comme il se void assez souvent, il est faux & preiudiciable. Il faut donc que le Cavalerice
considere premierement, si ceste pesanteur ou engourdissement d’espaules, ou de iambes, procede du
manquement de courage, de force, ou de souplesse naturelle, ou pour avoir esté peu ou mal exercé, ou
trop travaillé.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:50.
213
La Broue then discusses in considerable detail the pros and cons of uneven terrain as
a corrective in each of these cases. Unsurprisingly, sometimes it proves to be
beneficial and solves the problem, and sometimes it is pointless and may even create
new problems on top of the original one. It is up to the trainer to judge which will be
the case with each individual horse.
One might think that knowing when, how, and why to apply a particular
technique to a particular horse in a particular situation—especially given that the
number of possible techniques, horses, situations, and combinations thereof were
virtually endless—would be sufficient to qualify a rider as a skilled and
knowledgeable horseman. But in fact, the authors insist that several more qualities
also are needed. The truly wise and discriminating rider will have the foresight to
recognize a disobedience in the making and preemptively correct it before it
happens. He will have both the resolve and the patience to persist in his endeavor,
since most horses will not acquiesce after a single attempt to resist or evade their
rider’s wishes but will try out an entire repertoire before giving in. He will possess
the flexibility and adaptability to adjust—quickly, smoothly, and repeatedly—to the
demands of the moment, because every horse is different and circumstances change
constantly. Ultimately, in fact, there are no fixed rules in horsemanship, and
sometimes the rider even may find himself facing a situation for which he has no
immediate solution. In that case, he will be sufficiently resourceful to apply his
ingenuity and creativity to his knowledge base in order to invent an entirely new
technique to address that problem. Finally, the truly perfect horseman will be able to
214
do all of these things with speed and precision, even—or perhaps especially—in
circumstances that may be fraught with danger.
The manuals offer numerous examples of situations that will require each of
these aspects of vertu, often in combination with one or more of its other many
facets. Several authors comment on the importance of foresight, and all of those that
do note the role of the rider’s judgment, knowledge, and experience in that context.
La Broue, for example, makes the following general statement:
It is necessary that the rider be expeditious with his many good corrections,
in order to divert the horse, of whatever type it may be, from the various
faults already mentioned. For it is not enough to know how to punish [the
horse] after it has failed; the rider also must have the judgment and the
experience to anticipate it, attempting to prevent it from failing when it is
ready to do so.
322
La Broue, La Noue, Pluvinel, and Menou all remark on the particular importance of
foresight when performing the capriole, the most dramatic and potentially dangerous
of the high airs. Pluvinel and Menou make very similar points about foresight in that
context, saying that the rider must be especially careful in this situation to anticipate
a disobedience before it can occur. They suggest that the rider consider the horse’s
conformation, its action, and even the look in its eyes in order to assess its intentions
before it has a chance to carry them out. Armed with this knowledge, the rider then
322
“[I]l est necessaire que le Cavalerice soit diligent, pour divertir par plusieurs bons moyens le
cheval, quel qu’il soit, des susdites fautes. Car ce n’est pas assez de le sçavoir chastier apres qu’il a
failly, il faut necessairement que le bon Cavalerice aye le iugement & la pratique de le prevenir,
taschant de l’empescher de faillir, quand il s’y dispose.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:118.
215
can employ his wisdom, patience, judgment, and experience in order to choose the
correction that will best preempt his mount’s nefarious designs.
323
La Broue and La Noue are even more specific than Pluvinel and Menou,
addressing the use of foresight not just when performing the capriole but when
teaching it on the volte redoublée (a small circle of two or more revolutions). Both
horsemen note that this particular air is so demanding that the rider must be very
careful not to overdo, and if he happens to be dealing with a balky horse that flatly
refuses to move forward off his leg (the cheval ramingue), he must be especially
careful not to ask for it too many times in the same place. If he does, this particular
type of horse may begin to anticipate his wishes and to plan in advance how it might
avoid complying. In such a case, the rider must be wise and experienced enough to
recognize and preempt this behavior by taking the horse to a different location or
changing the exercise, so that it never has the opportunity to premeditate a resistance
or evasion.
324
In this particular example, foresight actually is used twice: the horse
323
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 123-124; Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 116. For the full quotes, see
nn. 438 and 444, below, in the chapter on the capriole.
324
“[S]a vigueur … luy pourroit estre accablée par la prattique de la iuste proportion de cét air, trop
opiniatrement continuée en un mesme lieu, où il a moyen de premediter comment il se pourra
maintenir en sa double & fingarde volonté, si le Cavalier n’y prevoit en l’en portant hors dés qu’il sent
qu’il s’y retient, ou s’y accule, & luy changeant de leçon, comme de place pour vaincre son déloyal
naturel….” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 134. “[L]e Cavalerice a beaucoup à faire
… pour empescher que les plus iustes proportions du manege, ne luy accablent la vigueur, ou le
reduisent plustost à quelque vice …, comme il advient facilement, quand le Cavalerice n’est sage &
bien experimenté, pour prevenir le malicieux, vile ou timide naturel du cheval, en le chassant souvent
du lieu, auquel il se retient & s’accule, & en luy diversifiant les leçons de façon qu’il ne puisse
premediter les effects malicieux de son courage double & fingard….” La Broue, Cavalerice françois,
1:166.
216
foresees the rider’s desire and tries to avoid it, and the rider foresees the horse’s
foresight and tries to preempt it.
325
Delcampe is exceptionally eloquent on the reasons for which the rider needs
to be both patient and determined, once again in conjunction with his judgment,
knowledge, and experience:
Of all the horses that you will attempt to train in all your life, you may never
perfect a single one that did not contradict itself, change its mind, or get
discouraged many times prior to being fully trained. Just when you think [a
horse] is nice and free in one direction, it suddenly will refuse you for reasons
you will be unable to figure out; and so changing its mood, about either
turning or working on a circle [in that direction], it will often subject you to
such escapades and flatly refuse you…. But don’t let that worry you or drive
you to despair: return to your principles …, [and] remember … that, in such
a situation, your knowledge, prudence, and judgment will put you in touch
with the fine methods and great patience of your art in such an appropriate
fashion that your reason will bring [the horse] right back to its duty….
326
The horse that happily performed a given task yesterday may refuse to do so
tomorrow for no apparent reason, but a good rider recognizes this possibility and
simply continues to ask—patiently but resolutely—until eventually the horse
abandons its whimsy and falls back into line.
327
325
For those who might question a horse’s ability to anticipate its rider’s wishes, it is worth noting
that this is absolutely possible. If, for example, a horse is repeatedly asked for the same movement at
the same spot in the arena, then eventually it will offer that movement every time it approaches that
spot, even if the rider has not specifically requested it.
326
“[D]e tous les chevaux que vous entreprendrez de dresser en toute vostre vie, vous n’en acheverés
peut-estre un seul, qui ne se demente, dedie, ou rebute par plusieurs fois, premier qu’il soit dressé, &
lors que vous le croirés bien libre à une main, il vous refusera tout d’un coup, sans que vous en
puissiés deviner la cause: & ainsi changeant d’humeur, ou pour tourner, ou pour manier sur les
voltes, il vous fera souvent de pareilles équipées, & vous refusera tont [sic] net …: mais que tout cela
ne vous desespere & ne vous inquiete seulement pas, revenés à vos principes …, souvenés-vous …
qu’il faut que vostre science, prudence & iugement fasse connoistre en ce rencontre la belle methode
& la longue patience de vostre art si à propos, que vostre raison le rameine à son devoir….”
Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 87-89.
327
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 2:174, points out what can happen in such situations if the rider
fails to retain his patience and determination and to employ his good judgment, and instead does allow
217
Pluvinel and Menou both juxtapose patience and resolve as qualities that the
bon homme de cheval requires. At first this seems paradoxical, but it soon becomes
clear that these authors associate patience with gentler training methods and resolve
with more severe techniques. On that continuum, an overly patient rider uses too
much douceur and as a result runs the risk of being too tolerant of his horse’s
misbehavior and letting it get away with innumerable “extravagances” and
“desordres.” The overly resolute rider, in contrast, uses too much force and is both
too quick to punish the horse for every little mistake it makes and too harsh in his
choice of punishment. A good horseman should be neither too much the one nor too
much the other, but should be able to employ judiciously either or both techniques
according to the circumstances in which he finds himself. As Menou puts it:
The rider who has reached perfection in the discipline of which I speak must
be [both] patient and resolute, because a man who uses only patience cannot
call himself knowledgeable, and he who uses only force and resolve … is
even more ignorant….
328
a horse’s behavior to drive him to despair: “[L]a diversité des humeurs & complexions, qui se
trouvent aux chevaux qu’on entreprend, & des desplaisantes mutations qu’ils font ordinairement, &
quelquefois en un quart d’heure, & lors qu’ils devroient estre gaignez & resolus, à ce qu’on les aura
long temps auparavant recherchez[,] peuvent souvent donner tel subiect de mescontentement & de
colere, que si en telles occasions les mouvemens de l’homme ne sont retenus & guidez par les forces
d’un iugement solide, ioinct à un bon naturel, il s’en ensuit une infinité de desordres rigoureux &
malseants….”
328
Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 75. The passage in its entirety reads: “Il faut que le Cavalier qui a
atteint la perfection de la science dont ie parle soit patient & resolu; car autrement un homme qui ne
se sert que de la patience ne se peut pas dire sçavant, & celuy qui ne met en usage que la force & la
resolution, & le plus souvent mal à propos est encores plus ignorant, & plus capable de gaster des
Chevaux par cette resolution inconsiderée, que de les reduire à la raison; mais pour les bien adjuster
ensemble & s’en servir utilement, il y faut prendre garde de prés; car si un homme souffre quantité
d’extravagances & de desordres à son Cheval sans raison (pource qu’il en faut quelquesfois endurer
avec iugement) & sans qu’il le chastie, celuy-là se doit veritablement nommer ignorant & non pas
patient; comme aussi celuy qui bat son Cheval sans necessité, & lors qu’il n’a besoin que des aydes[,]
qui le tourmente des esperons, de la gaule, de la bride & du cavesson au moindre petit manquement
qu’il faict, sans chercher autre invention pour le ramener, quand il commet ses legeres fautes; je
nomme aussi tres-certainement cét homme là, colere ignorant, & non pas resolu; car la resolution est
218
Pluvinel agrees, reminding us that the truly perfect horseman always uses his
knowledge, experience, and judgment, first to assess the nature and potential of his
mount and then, “having that knowledge, to begin, continue, and finish the horse
with the patience and resolve, gentleness and severity, required to arrive at the end to
which the good horseman must aspire….”
329
Another key quality that the authors of these treatises mention repeatedly is
flexibility: the ability to adapt or adjust in the blink of an eye (or the beat of a hoof,
as the case may be) to whatever the horse may do. La Noue leaves it to the
discretion of the judicious rider to dispense with the usual rules depending on the
moment. Pluvinel says that the prudent horseman must use whatever method is most
suited to the time, the occasion, and the need. Pluvinel, Menou, and Delcampe all
stress that their methods are conducted according to the occasion and consist, among
other things, in changing the action as needed and from moment to moment.
330
The
phrases “selon le besoin,” “selon l’occasion,” “selon les temps” echo throughout
these passages, emphasizing several other, related equestrian truisms: there are no
proprement de chastier le Cheval quand il est temps, & non autrement.” Menou, Pratique du
cavalier, 75-76. Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 19-20, makes a similar statement.
329
“… ayant cette cognoissance, commencer, continuer, & achever, le cheval avec la patience, & la
resolution, la douceur, & la force requise, pour arriver à la fin ou le bon homme de cheval doit
aspirer….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 10. Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 26, says the same thing.
330
“[I]e laisse à la discretion du judicieux Cavalerice de se dispenser de la prattique des reigles
generales selon l’occasion….” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 65. “[L]e prudent
homme de cheval doit faire la guerre à l’œil, & se servir des moyens selon les temps, les occasions &
le besoin….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 97. “[N]ostre façon de travailler n’estant conduit que
selon les occasions, … nostre methode consiste au iugement à faire la guerre à l’œil, changer de
moment en moment l’action selon le besoin….” Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 155; Pluvinel,
Instruction du Roy, 144, says virtually the same. “[L]a belle methode consiste au iugement, & à faire
comme l’on dit, la guerre à l’œil, changer de moment en moment d’action & de conduite selon que la
necessité le requiert….” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 281-282.
219
hard and fast rules on which the rider can rely, because every horse is different, so
the only thing that can be guaranteed is constant change. A technique that worked
for one horse in a particular situation may not work for another horse in the same
situation, while a technique that worked for a particular horse in one situation may
not work for that same horse in another situation. Several authors allude to the fact
that this can be taken yet further: a technique that worked for a particular horse in a
particular situation on one day may not work for that same horse in that same
situation on the next day, simply because of fluctuations in equine mood.
Pluvinel, Menou, and Delcampe are particularly clear on the interrelated
issues of the need for rider adaptability, the lack of reliable rules, the unpredictable
nature of horses, and the inevitability of change. Pluvinel explains that “definitive
maxims cannot be given, because horses are not all of the same nature, some wanting
to be forced, others caressed, some worked hard, others little….”
331
All three authors
comment on how utterly impossible it really is to try to write down every single
thing a rider will need to know in order to train his horses properly, specifically
because riding and training are all about responding to the demands of the moment,
which are in a state of constant flux. Here Menou is speaking:
It is impossible to be able to say or write in detail that which it is necessary to
do to reduce horses to the perfection that one desires of them: the rider’s
hand and leg aids, regulated by his excellent judgment and long experience in
the discipline, are the only things that will give him the means to execute at
the right time the thousands and thousands of things that can be neither
331
“[I]l ne s’en peut donner de maximes determinees en ce que les chevaux ne sont pas tous d’une
mesme nature: Les uns voulans estre forcez, & les autres carressez; Les uns fort travalllez [sic], & les
autres peu….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 83.
220
written nor spoken except on the occasion and at the instant that there is need
of them.
332
Delcampe offers the most definitive statement, nicely summarizing all these issues
and underlining the need for the rider to use his knowledge and experience (and, of
course, his judgment) in order to adapt to the demands of the moment, which change
constantly and differ from horse to horse:
There is no guaranteed rule in the art of horseback riding, due to the variety,
malice, and anxiety that one notices [in horses], not only every day and every
hour that one works horses or has them worked, but [also] generally speaking
at every moment that one pursues them and asks something precise of
them…. It is [therefore] absolutely necessary that the good rider and learned
trainer, based on his knowledge and experience, change his method just as
often as his horse resists him by changing its mood.
333
La Broue and La Noue both point out an additional factor to be considered in
this context: no matter how flexible the rider may be, no matter how great his skill,
how large his knowledge base, or how good his judgment, there will come a time
when all these qualities still are not enough. Horses being what they are, eventually
332
“[I]l est impossible de pouvoir dire ou escrire par le menu tout ce qu’il est besoin de faire pour
reduire les Chevaux à la perfection de ce que l’on desire d’eux: La pratique seule de la main du
Cavalier & de ses talons adioustée à un excellent iugement & un long usage en l’exercice, est ce qui
luy donnera le moyen d’executer à temps mille & mille choses qui ne se peuvent escrire ny dire que
dans l’occasion & à l’instant qu’il en est besoin.” Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 139. Pluvinel,
Instruction du Roy, 133, says almost exactly the same thing. See also Delcampe, Art de monter à
cheval, 281: “[S]i i’avois voulu rediger par escrit, & particulariser par le menu toutes les Leçons dont
il est besoin de se servir en toutes rencontres, il me seroit du tout impossible, estant tres-vray que
nostre maniere de travailler n’estant conduite que selon les occasions, n’y ayant point de reigle
certaine en nostre Art….”
333
“[I]l n’y a point de regle certaine dans l’art de monter à cheval, à cause de la varieté, malice &
inquietude que l’on remarque, non seulement tous les iours & toutes les heures que l’on travaille, ou
que l’on fait travailler des chevaux: mais generalement parlant à tous les momens que l’on les
recherche, & que l’on leur demande quelque chose de juste…. [I]l est absolument necessaire que le
bon Cavalier & Escuyer sçavant change selon sa science & experience aussi souvent de methode que
son cheval luy resiste en changeant d’humeur.” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 29-30.
Elsewhere, he reiterates the importance of being able to adjust one’s methods to the given situation:
“[I]l faut absolument en cette science user de temps & de mesure, & l’un & l’autre diminuer ou
accroistre, avec un iugement net & entier & une intelligence parfaite….” Delcampe, “De l’Excellence
de l’art de monter à cheval,” 8.
221
the rider will be faced with a resistance, an evasion, or a behavior for which he has
no existing antidote. When this occurs, the rider must be very resourceful, drawing
on his knowledge of and experience with other horses in similar situations and then
applying his creativity and imagination to that information in order to craft a new
method to correct the problem at hand. La Broue makes the following general
statement on the importance of ingenuity and invention:
When the horse flees from or is opposed to obeying its schooling in new and
unexpected ways, the very occurrence of these things must stimulate the
judgment and invention of the good horseman to give birth at that moment to
a corresponding number of new remedies.
334
Speaking specifically of trained manège horses that have become sour (cauteleux &
rusez), La Broue adds: “The most excellent masters are kept quite busy every day
with inventing new and subtle means needed to make them consent to obeying
correct schooling.”
335
La Noue takes this concept yet further, stating that, even when
a horse’s problem stems from a “defect of nature, if the rider is judicious and gifted
with ability, he will be able to provide [a solution] by some means that he will invent
all by himself without borrowing from elsewhere….”
336
Creativity under pressure is
thus a highly desirable quality in a variety of contexts.
334
“[Q]uand bien le cheval fuyra, ou s’opposera à l’obeïssance de l’escole, par des moyens nouveaux
& inopinez, l’occasion mesmes d’iceux, doit faire naistre à l’instant, autant de nouveaux remedes au
iugement, & à l’invention de bon Cavalerice.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 2:173.
335
“[L]es plus excellens maistres sont assez empeschez, à inventer tous les iours de nouveaux &
subtils moyens propres à les faire consentir à l’obeyssance de la bonne escole.” La Broue, Cavalerice
françois, 2:126.
336
“Pour le regard du defaut de nature, si le Cavalerice est iudicieux & doüé d’industrie, il y pourra
pourvoir par quelques moyens qu’il inventera de luy mesme sans en emprunter ailleurs….” P. de la
Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 40.
222
Finally and perhaps most importantly, the perfect horseman must be able to
deploy all of his skill, knowledge, and judgment with speed and precision, no matter
what the circumstances. Modern equine science has determined that horses have an
attention span of less than three seconds, so any response a rider makes to his horse’s
behavior must take place within that interval in order for the horse to make the
connection between its own action and the rider’s reaction. The rider thus needs not
only to be able to make a wise and well-judged choice when responding to his
horse’s behavior but also to be able to do so extremely quickly, and this holds true
whether he is rewarding the horse or punishing it. As La Broue puts it, “promptness
is also one of the finest qualities that the horseman can have, especially since even
the best aids and corrections, if made at the wrong time, cause more confusion than
precision or obedience.”
337
Menou and Pluvinel are particularly eloquent on the
need for speed and clarity of thought under pressure; here Menou is speaking:
A man can learn [to ride] only by mounting a horse and resolving himself to
endure all the extravagances that can be expected of an irrational animal, the
perils that are to be encountered amidst the rage, despair, and cowardice of
such animals, as well as the fear of feeling the effects thereof. All of these
things can be neither overcome nor avoided without knowledge of the
discipline, goodness of spirit, and soundness of judgment, all of which [the
rider] must employ during the worst of all these torments with the same speed
and indifference as someone who, sitting in his study, is trying to learn
something from a book. This is so true that [one] can see quite clearly the
extent to which this noble exercise is useful to the mind, because it teaches
and accustoms it to execute all these functions clearly and with order amidst
noise, confusion, agitation, and continuous fear of peril….
338
337
“La diligence est aussi une des plus belles parties, que le Cavalerice puisse avoir: d’autant que les
meilleurs secours & chastimens faits hors de leur temps, ameinent aucunefois plus de confusion, que
de iustesse ny d’obeyssance.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 2:57.
338
“[L]’homme ne le peut apprendre qu’en montant sur un Cheval, duquel il faut qu’il se resolve de
souffrir toutes les extravagances qui se peuvent attendre d’un animal irraisonnable. Les perils qui se
223
In other words, unlike book learning, horsemanship requires and teaches its
practitioner to exercise his knowledge, his excellence of mind and spirit, and his
judgment, coolly and quickly, clearly and in an orderly fashion, while under pressure
or even while in danger.
In short, the successful rider, like the successful warrior, must have many of
the qualities associated with noble vertu: he must be brave, daring, and physically
powerful; he must have a thorough knowledge of his craft and be skilled at and
experienced in all its nuances; he must be able to apply his skill, knowledge and
experience with judgment, wisdom, discretion, foresight, and prudence; he must be
resolute yet patient, as well as resourceful and inventive; he must be able to adjust
his response in the face of constant change; and he must be able to think clearly and
react quickly under perilous conditions.
These parallels remain strong across all the texts used for this study, up to
and including the 1664 treatise of Delcampe. In his chapter entitled, “On the
disposition that he who wishes to embrace the art of horsemanship must have,”
Delcampe could just as easily be describing the ideal warrior-knight of the previous
century:
rencontrent parmy la colere, le desespoir & la lascheté de tels animaux joint aux apprehensions d’en
ressentir les efforts [sic]. Toutes lesquelles choses ne se peuvent vaincre ne [sic] esviter qu’avec la
connoissance de la science, la bonté de l’esprit & la solidité du iugement, lequel faut qu’il agisse dans
le plus fort de tous ces tourments, avec le mesme promptitude & froideur que fait celuy qui estant
dans son cabinet, tasche d’apprendre quelque chose dans un livre. Tellement que, par-là, il se void
tres-aysément comme ce bel exercice est util à l’esprit, puis qu’il l’instruit & l’accoustume d’executer
nettement & avec ordre toutes ces fonctions parmy le tracas, le bruit, l’agitation & la peur continuelle
du peril….” Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 18. Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 3, says almost exactly
the same thing.
224
He must be very strong, energetic, vigorous, and utterly fearless, and all his
qualities [must] be governed by a clear and absolute judgment, without ever
losing his orientation in any encounter whatsoever, in order to be able to use
them when needed with prudence, judgment, and good management.
339
The longstanding noble attribute of martial vertu clearly was alive and well within
the belief system of the traditional French nobility during the first half of the
seventeenth century, at least among those nobles who practiced manège equitation.
339
“[I]l doit estre tres nerveux & fort vigoureux, & sans aucune apprehension, & [il faut] que toutes
ses qualitez soient gouvernées d’un iugement net & entier, sans iamais perdre la tramontane en
quelque rencontre que ce soit, afin de s’en pouvoir servir au besoin avec prudence, iugement & bonne
conduite.” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 41-42.
225
CHAPTER 7
Vertu and the Pesade
As the previous chapter demonstrated, virtually any mounted maneuver had
the potential to call on a nobleman’s vertu. The movements that best showcased the
qualities comprising this attribute, however, were that particularly dramatic subset of
manège equitation called the airs above the ground. Based on the way the pesade
and its use are described in the sources, this movement actually was not viewed by
contemporaries as a true air relevé. It was, however, a necessary prerequisite to all
the higher airs, and, as this chapter will demonstrate, achieving a correct pesade
required many aspects of the rider’s vertu.
That the pesade was not considered by early modern French horsemen to be a
genuine high air is evidenced by this movement’s absence from the lists of the airs
commonly practiced in the late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries that appear in
each of the texts used for this study. All six authors concur that the capriole and its
derivatives—the croupade, the balotade, and un pas et un saut—were true high airs.
All of them also include the courbette in their lists, although it is not always clear
whether the individual author considers this movement to be an air relevé or simply
an air—that is, a movement that does not come naturally to the horse and must be
taught. La Noue, Delcampe, and Guillet explicitly identify the courbette as a high
air, whereas La Broue, Pluvinel, and Menou are more ambiguous. None of the last
three specifically deny that the courbette was a high air, however, so it will be
226
assumed that this movement generally was viewed as one of the airs above the
ground.
340
Beyond those five movements, the lists vary somewhat. La Broue says that,
in his youth, something called pesades sauts du mouton were one of the common airs
but that they have since been dropped. Unfortunately, he does not define the move,
so it is impossible to know how it differed from a regular pesade, although the
inclusion of the word saut (jump) would imply that it involved some sort of aerial
activity, which the standard pesade did not. Menou and Delcampe add the mesair,
which was a movement that fell midway between the terre à terre and the
courbette,
341
and Delcampe lists several other airs that are for the most part
derivatives of or variations on those already listed.
342
Both Menou and Pluvinel also
340
For the complete lists of airs, see La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:140; P. de la Noue, Cavalerie
françoise et italienne, 112; Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 15, 118; Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 111-
112; Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 190; Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 5 (s.v. “airs relevés”),
though cf. 122 (s.v. “sauteur”), where he reverses his initial position on the courbette and explicitly
excludes it from the high airs. He is, however, the only one to do so.
341
Although Menou and Delcampe are the only authors to include the mesair in their lists of airs, all
of them (except Menou, who only lists it) describe it somewhere; see La Broue, Cavalerice françois,
2:48; P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 138; Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 96; Delcampe,
Art de monter à cheval, 191; Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 93; see also DAF, s.v. “mézair.”
Different sources call this movement different things: most call it mesair or a variant thereof (mes-
air, més-air, mezair, mézair, mezert, used respectively by Pluvinel, Delcampe, Guillet, La Noue,
DAF, Menou); some call it demy-air or demi-air (La Broue, DAF); Delcampe also calls it moitié air.
Most sources stipulate that it is higher than the terre à terre (La Broue, La Noue, Pluvinel, Guillet,
DAF), several specify that it is lower than the courbette (La Noue, Guillet, Pluvinel), and Delcampe
and Guillet say it has the same motion as the terre à terre and the courbette. P. de la Noue, Cavalerie
françoise et italienne, 124, says that croupade and balotade also are called mezair because they are
higher than a courbette but not so high as a capriole, but he is the only one to do so.
342
Specifically, Delcampe begins his list with “le plus relevé que terre à terre,” which he defines as
“celuy qui sans marquer les courbettes, paroist plus gay & plus relevé que le terre à terre” (Art de
monter à cheval, 191); given that it is followed by “le mes-air ou moitié air,” one assumes it is a
further refinement between the regular terre à terre and the mesair. In addition to regular croupades,
he includes “les hautes croupades” (also mentioned by Guillet; see Arts de l’homme d’épée, 45, s.v.
“croupades”) and “les sauts ou maneges d’un temp.” Delcampe is the only author who mentions this
last movement, which he defines as follows: “Les saults ou maneges d’un temps, est [sic] un air tout
particulier, & beau de force & de vigueur, & tres-esgal devant & derriere. Le cheval se doit eslever en
227
include in their lists of airs the terre à terre, which was not in any way “above the
ground” but was, like the courbette, not a movement the horse performed naturally.
The one air—relevé or otherwise—that none of these lists includes is the
pesade. Its absence is never explained, but it is possible that it did not merit
inclusion in a list of airs because it was viewed as a movement the horse performed
naturally, which is not entirely untrue, and that it was not considered to be an air
relevé because it was never performed in its own right.
343
Instead, the pesade was
viewed primarily as a stepping-stone to the true airs above the ground—something
the horse absolutely had to be able to do and to do well in order to move on to the
more elevated movements. La Noue repeatedly and explicitly tells us this: “Pesades
… are the base on which [the rider] must build his high airs….” “Pesades … open
the way to all the high airs.” “Pesades are the foundation of all the other high
airs….”
344
Guillet concurs: “When you want to teach your horse courbettes,
pesades must serve as its first lesson, because they are the foundation of all the
Airs.”
345
None of the other authors is quite as explicit in this regard, but they really
do not need to be: their descriptions of the training progression for all the higher airs
pliant les quatre jambes, & retomber les quatre fers ensemble, avec telle esgalité & justesse, que l’on
n’entende qu’un seul coup lors qu’il tombe, puis il se doit aussi-tost eslever de la mesme cadance, &
marquer autant de temps que sa force & vigueur luy pourra permettre.” He then concludes: “[Il] y a
peu de chevaux qui continuent dans cet air: pour moy ie n’en ay iamais veu que deux depuis vingt
cinq ans que ie suis dans la profession.” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 194-195. Its extreme
rarity may explain why no other author bothers to mention this air.
343
It is unlikely that the pesade was not counted among the airs relevés because only the forehand left
the ground. Most contemporaries considered the courbette to be a high air, and the horse was never
fully off the ground in that movement, either.
344
P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 113, 114, 136, respectively.
345
“Quand vous voudrés mettre vostre cheval à Courbettes, il faudra que les Pésades luy servent de
premiére leçon, car elles sont le fondement de tous les Airs.” Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 105
(s.v. “pesade”).
228
make it abundantly clear that only those horses that have mastered the art of raising
their forehands could be expected to perform any of the airs relevés, all of which
were taught from that basic movement.
346
Given the above, it seems clear that most if not all horses trained for the
manège were expected to perform the pesade and that those unable to master this
basic building block for the more complex airs were relegated to less demanding
activities. Several authors, in fact, explicitly concede that not all horses are suitable
for the lofty activities of the manège and would be put to better use elsewhere. La
Noue says, for example:
Even though all [horses] are born to serve man, sometimes the gentility of
some merits more respect than the strength of others. As evidence of this, we
see some that have such spirit and such elegant action that they exude nothing
but the battlefield and the tiltyard, and others that, although they are of a
decent height and conformation to be useful to a rider, are so insensitive and
clumsy with their legs that they nonetheless prove to serve more honorably
under the pack saddle than the riding saddle.
347
La Broue makes a similar point, noting that “all horses cannot be born for the
pleasure of the lists and that it even is unfair to a horse that is suited only to the plow
346
For a representative sampling of the role of the pesade in teaching the horse the higher airs, see
passim La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:145-174; P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne,
128-140; Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 124-138; Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 114-155; Delcampe,
Art de monter à cheval, 239-247, 253-262.
347
“[E]ncore que tous soient nez pour le service de l’homme, si est-ce toutesfois, que la gentilesse des
uns merite plus de respect que la force des autres; & pour le témoigner, nous en voyons qui sont de
courage & d’action si relevez, qu’il ne respirent que la campagne & la carriere, & d’autres, qui bien
qu’ils soient assez bien formez, & de bonne taille, pour l’usage du Cavalier, se sentent toutesfois plus
honorez du bast que de la selle, tant ils sont insensibles & peu adroits de leurs membres.” P. de la
Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 111.
229
or the pack saddle to make it serve as a riding horse.”
348
Pluvinel is particularly
colorful on this issue:
There are horses so stupid, so cowardly, with so little strength in their backs,
feet, and legs, that all they can do is stroll along for a couple of miles each
day. Such horses are better suited to a cart than to the manège…. Yet there
are others that are strong enough and that have good feet and legs, but their
lack of spirit makes them so lethargic and insensitive that it is necessary to
employ all one’s skill in order to rouse them.
Pluvinel then outlines a series of increasingly drastic means for dealing with this type
of animal, and he concludes:
If this method … does not bring [the horse] to the state that the rider desires
within a few days, one must believe that it is solely a lack of strength that
prevents it, in which case the wrong is irremediable: man is not required to
achieve the impossible.
349
In short, there will be some horses that simply will be unable to master even the most
basic necessities for a successful career in the manège. All of these passages indicate
that such animals were indeed banished to less exalted pursuits.
Those that remained, however, were required to learn the pesade. This
movement already has been described as a highly controlled rear, in which the horse
348
“Il faut avoir esgard que tous ne peuvent pas estre nez, pour le plaisir de la carriere, & que mesmes
l’on fait tort au cheval, qui n’est propre pour la charruë, ou pour le bast, de le faire servir à la selle.”
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:139; see also 1:138: “[L]’erreur est presque aussi grande de vouloir
faire servir à la guerre le cheval, qui est nay pour les sauts, comme de faire sauter celuy, qui n’est
propre que pour le manege bas.”
349
“Il y a des chevaux si stupides, si poltrons, avec si peu de force aux reins, aux pieds, & aux jambes,
que tout ce qu’ils peuvent faire est de cheminer deux lieues par jour. Tels sont plus propres à la
charette qu’au Maneige…. Mais il y en a d’autres qui ont assez bonne force, beaux pieds & belles
jambes, que le peu de courage rend si lasches & insensibles, qu’il faut y apporter bien de l’artifice
pour les resveiller…. [S]i cette leçon … ne le met en peu de iours en l’estat que le Chevalier desire, il
faut croire que l’inpuissance seule l’en empesche; auquel cas le mal est sans remede: puis que
l’homme n’est pas obligé à l’impossible.” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 65-66. Elsewhere Pluvinel
discusses the custom of the Italians, who do not even attempt to train horses that lack “toutes les
qualitez necessaires pour bien manier”; instead of trying to work with horses that are “choleres &
impatiens, meschans, lasches, paresseux, mauvaise bouche & pesante …, au contraire ils les envoyent
au carosse.” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 29-30.
230
lowered its haunches, lifted its forehand fully off the ground, tucked in its forelegs,
and briefly held the pose without moving its hind feet. Based on that rather prosaic
description, one might be tempted to assume that getting a horse to perform this
maneuver was not so very difficult. Menou and Delcampe seem to support that
assumption: Menou does not discuss training the horse to pesade at all,
350
and
Delcampe’s instructions make no allowance for the uncooperative pupil. Based on
his descriptions of the training process, all the trainer has to do is get the horse’s
haunches sufficiently engaged underneath it, and the pesade will follow.
351
La
Broue is more realistic, stipulating that the horse first must have mastered all the
basics before being introduced to this air. He then describes how to teach this
350
As a general rule throughout his text (and with the notable exception of the capriole), Menou does
not spend a lot of time talking about how to train the horse to perform the various airs. In many cases,
he does not even describe the aids the rider is supposed to use to cue the horse; he simply instructs the
rider to ask for the movement in question. He offers no suggestions for what to do if the horse fails to
respond but seems to assume that it will obey almost magically. In many of his lessons, Menou
simply says the horse will “s’accommoder à” or “se presenter à” or “prendre” “son air” or “sa
cadence,” as if each horse has a preferred air that it will pick up spontaneously when the time is right.
The general message seems to be that, if his instructions have been followed up to that point, the
horse will volunteer whatever “mesure” the rider desires, without benefit of any training aimed
specifically at producing it. Numerous examples of this leitmotif can be found in Menou’s chapters
on the early phases of training horses with various types of temperaments: chap. 26, “Du colere
impatient & meschant tout ensemble”; chap. 27, “Du leger, gentil, & de bonne nature”; chap. 28, “Du
lasche & paresseux”; chap. 29, “Du pesant & malicieux”; chap. 30, “Du desesperé de bouche”
(Pratique du cavalier, 59-68). Although Menou does acknowledge that at least some of these types
will resist at the beginning, the impression is that his (in many cases very briefly outlined) methods
always will triumph in the end.
351
“[F]aites-le mettre entre les … pilliers …, postez-vous derriere avec [sic] luy avec une bonne
chambriere, & … frappez de vostre chambriere contre terre, & directement derriere luy, ce qui
l’obligera de donner dans les cordes du cavesson: & ainsi vous le ferez avancer & reculer tant que
lesdites cordes le pourront permettre: & continuez cette leçon iusques à ce que vous voyez que le
cheval baisse un peu les hanches, & qu’il se prepare de luy mesme. Enfin obligez le ainsi doucement,
& peu à peu à lever le devant….” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 34-36. Elsewhere, Delcampe
suggests using a downhill slope to put the horse’s haunches underneath it: “[V]ous le ferez conduire
en un lieu un peu panchant, ou calade, afin de luy donner de facilité & d’aisance de s’asseoir sur les
hanches, & continuer quelque temps cette leçon, afin de luy accoustumer & luy apprendre à lever le
devant sans impatience, afin qu’il puisse marquer quelque trois ou quatre posades au parer ou à son
arrest….” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 124.
231
movement to a horse that is naturally “leger à la main,” or one that does not lean on
the bit, which presupposes a light forehand, which in turn presupposes engaged
haunches.
352
Like Delcampe, La Broue takes it as given that such a horse will offer a
pesade with little prompting and no objections.
353
Unlike Delcampe, however, La
Broue freely acknowledges that there are many horses that will not fall into this
category and that will need to be treated accordingly in order to achieve the desired
result:
If [the horse] is naturally hot-tempered and quick to react, heavy on the
forehand, or overly sensitive, and if, instead of raising its forehand, it hops its
forefeet up and down, throws itself backward, disgraces itself, or resists
[trepigne, s’accule, s’avillisse, ou se defende], then one must make it change
place frequently, at the trot and sometimes at the canter, depending on
whether it can be controlled; this is a means of distracting it from any other
malicious intentions. And if, after all that, it does not offer to raise its
forehand, happily or just obediently, there is no risk at all, in such an extreme
case, in getting after [the horse] with the bridle, the whip, or the spurs until it
raises its forehand, well or poorly, while preventing it above all from halting
and backing up, in order to deny it further opportunity to resist. As soon as
[the horse] has done a pesade, whether good or bad, the rider should release
the reins and pat it while proceeding straight ahead at the collected walk, and
[he] should have someone, who is standing by on foot expressly for that
purpose, give it a small treat.
After walking for a short period, … the rider should prepare [the
horse] again and then gently ask it once more to lift its forehand and, if
necessary, get after it yet again, in order to obtain another pesade, of
352
Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 85 (s.v. “leger”), defines a “cheval qui est leger à la main” as one
“qui a la bouche bonne, qui ne pèse pas sur le mords. Les chevaux qui sont déchargés du devant …
sont ordinairement legers à la main.” Based on the principles of collection, a horse that accepts the
bit—that neither leans on the rider’s hands nor tries to evade the bit by bringing its head either above
or behind the vertical—is able to do so because it is correctly engaged behind and therefore is
carrying more of its weight with its haunches, which automatically lightens its forehand, or makes it
“déchargé du devant.”
353
“Quand … le cheval sera ferme de teste & de bouche, asseuré au manege de trot & de galop large
& estroit à l’obeïssance des communs & bons chastimens, le Cavalerice le menera (s’il est leger à la
main) en divers lieux pleins & unis, là où en allant le pas par le droict: il taschera à le hausser de
devant, sans l’arrester, le soustenant de la main, & luy aydant avec les gras des iambes, la pointe de la
gaule, & le son & advertissement de la langue.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:148.
232
whatever quality, without worrying too much about its correctness, if, for
example, it doesn’t want to keep its body straight or does some other
incorrect thing with its forelegs or its head: in this initial training period, too
many different corrections will only confuse it.
354
Although La Broue here allows for several possible causes for the horse’s
disobedience, as well as several possible ways in which said disobedience might
manifest itself, he really only offers one possible remedy: if the horse resists the
initial request for a pesade, trot and canter it around until the misbehavior is no
longer fresh in its mind, and then ask again. If that does not work, abuse the horse’s
mouth and lay into it with whip and spurs until it produces some approximation of a
pesade. Once the desired response—lifting the forehand—has been achieved, the
movement (and presumably the brutality of the aids required to achieve it) then can
be refined over time.
There are numerous other reasons beyond those given by La Broue why a
horse might not produce a pesade the first time it was asked, as well as multiple
other ways in which the horse’s reluctance might be expressed. Of all the authors,
La Noue and Pluvinel describe the range of possible equine vagaries the best, and
354
“Et s’il est naturellement colere, terraignol, ou trop sensible, & que au lieu de se hausser, il
trepigne, s’accule, s’avillisse, ou se defende, alors il luy faudra souvent changer de place, au trot, &
quelquefois au galop, selon qu’il se retiendra: car c’est un moyen de le divertir, d’aucuns desseins
malicieux. Et si pour cela, il ne se represente pour se lever gayement, ou par obeïssance, il n’y aura
point de danger à l’extremité, de le contraindre avec la bride, la gaule ou les esperons iusques à ce
qu’il aye haussé le devant mal ou bien l’empeschant surtout de s’arrester, & de reculer, afin de luy
oster beaucoup d’occasions de se defendre. Soudain qu’il aura faict une pesade bonne ou mauvaise,
le Cavalerice luy rendra la main, & le caressera en cheminant le petit pas par le droict, & luy fera
donner quelque friandise par un homme à pied qui se tiendra expressément devant ce cheval. [New
paragraph] Ayant encores cheminé quelque peu de temps, … le Cavalerice recommencera à l’advertir,
& rechercher doucement de hausser le devant & s’il est besoin le contraindra de nouveau, pour en tirer
encores une autre pesade comment qu’elle soit faite, sans s’amuser beaucoup à la iustesse, si
d’aventure, il ne vouloit tenir le corps droit, ou s’il faisoit quelque autre desordre de bras ou de la
teste: car en ces commencemens, la diversité des chastimens le confondroient d’avantage.” La
Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:148-149.
233
their texts probably reflect the actual experience of a contemporary trainer most
closely. Pluvinel dismisses the training process for the cooperative horse—one that
is “leger & uny”—in a single sentence,
355
after which he proceeds immediately to a
litany of methods for dealing with other, more difficult types of horses; La Noue also
offers only brief instructions for training “chevaux d’esprit vif et legers,”
356
and they
are buried in his lengthy catalog of problems that can arise when attempting to train
horses of less promising temperament and the myriad techniques the trainer may
have to employ to overcome said problems. In the process of explaining how to
work with horses that are less than anxious to learn the pesade, both Pluvinel and La
Noue highlight the rider’s need for various qualities of vertu when teaching them this
movement.
In his discussion of two very different types of horse—one that is “lazy,
lethargic, and heavy” (in the rider’s hand and/or on its feet), and the other that is
“impatient, hot-tempered, quick to react, sensitive, and vigorous”—La Noue notes
the importance of adjusting both the movement and the method to the nature of the
individual horse. When working with the former type, the rider first must consider
the horse’s youth and its weaknesses of both mind and body—in other words, why it
is lazy, lethargic, and heavy, which can vary from horse to horse based precisely on
the factors La Noue names. Once that assessment has been made, he continues, the
355
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 46; see n. 371, below, for the full quote.
356
“[Les pesades] seront pareillement propres aux chevaux d’esprit vif & legers, qu’on y doit porter
seulement au petit pas, les y tentant simplement de la voix, du gras de la jambe, rarement de l’éperon,
& quelquesfois en leur donnant du bout de la gaule sur les bras, s’y comportant au reste fort
doucement, de peur de les mettre en fougue & en fuite.” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et
italienne, 115.
234
rider then can teach it pesades that are either “bold and sprightly or easy and gentle,”
alternately working the horse quietly at whatever pesade suits it best and letting it
rest by walking and trotting it, but never allowing it to stop entirely.
357
This process
requires the rider to employ his skill, knowledge, and experience with good
judgment, discretion, and patience, all while constantly adjusting to the fluctuating
demands of the given moment.
Based on La Noue’s description, this method would not be suitable to the
second type of horse, which would be much more of a handful. Such horses, he
warns, cannot tolerate raising their forehands while standing still and will go to great
lengths to avoid doing so. In this case as in the previous one, the rider must modify
the pesade to suit the horse’s temperament, because this type of horse prefers
pesades that are “long and wide, rather than short and narrow.” It will endure the
latter only against its will and is likely to harm its rider in response to that degree of
restriction on its freedom.
358
Here La Noue is acknowledging that, even though this
more relaxed version of the pesade is less correct than a truly collected one, it is
better to be satisfied with what the horse will give willingly than to impose demands
that will only make it rebel. In this situation, the rider must call on all the same
357
“[O]n tient communément que ceux qui sont paresseux, láches, & pesans, s’y pourront allegerir, en
ayant autant de respect à leur ieunesse qu’à la foiblesse[,] tant de leurs esprits que de leurs corps,
selon lesquelles il les leur faudra donner, ou gaillardes, ou douces, & faciles, les y travaillant
discretement, & les en retirant avec plaisir, pour les y reporter en autres lieux au pas & au trot, sans
les arrester.” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 114.
358
“On les pourra aussi faire prattiquer aux chevaux, qui ne souffriront-pas d’estre relevez de ferme à
ferme, & qui pour fuïr les pesades s’en iront confusément çà & là; mais elles doivent estre
proportionnées à leurs forces & courage, parce qu’un cheval impatient, colere, sensible, & vigoureux,
les veut longues & larges, & non courtes & étroites, esquelles il ne se tiendra qu’à contre-cœur, & en
tachant d’offenser son Cavalier pour se voir si resserré, & sa liberté si condemnée….” P. de la Noue,
Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 114-115.
235
qualities needed to cope with the lazy and lethargic horse, but the hot-tempered and
impatient horse also requires courage, boldness, and the ability to think and act
quickly under potentially perilous conditions: if things should take a turn for the
worse on such an animal, they are likely to do with speed and fury, so the rider must
be able to make fast and accurate decisions in order to avoid being hurt.
Pluvinel begins his description of training the horse to pesade with the horse
that is “leger & des-uny.” It is not entirely clear what he means by des-uny in this
context; according to Guillet, a horse that is disunited is one that changes leads at the
canter or that canters on the wrong lead. In current usage, one says that a horse is
cantering disunited when it is cross-cantering, that is, when its front feet are on one
lead and its hind feet are on the other.
359
The pesade, however, had nothing to do
with cantering, so it is difficult to determine Pluvinel’s precise meaning here. When
he refers to a horse that is “leger & des-uny,” he may mean a horse that is light (in
the rider’s hand and/or on its feet, and thus presumably engaged behind) but that is in
some other way not correctly “together” in terms of the relationship between its
forehand and its haunches. Whatever his exact meaning, his solution is as follows:
Have the horse attached between the pillars. Then … dismount, and a little
after that, gently strike its chest with the whip while encouraging it with the
359
The relevant definitions from Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, are as follows: “Cheval qui se
désunit, qui traine les hanches, qui galloppe faux, ou sur le mauvais pied” (51, s.v. “dés-unir”);
“Galopper faux, se dés-unir, trainer les hanches, changer de pied, aller ou courre sur le faux pied,
galopper sur le mauvais pied” (74, s.v. “galopper”); “Trainer les hanches … est changer de pied en
galoppant” (79, s.v. “hanche”). Under galopper faux, Guillet gives a more complete description of
what the horse’s front and hind legs are doing, but it remains unclear whether he is describing a horse
that is cross-cantering or is simply on the wrong lead. His definition of unir indicates that he indeed
means cross-cantering: “Cette expression regarde le galop, & signifie que le train de derriére suit &
accompagne bien celuy de devant. Cheval qui est uny, dont les deux trains, devant & derriére, ne font
qu’une mesme action….” Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 135.
236
voice, in order to teach it to [raise its forehand]. If it does not respond and
does not obey, as is sometimes the case with [horses] that are so easily
angered or so stupid that the smallest new thing bothers them so much that
they don’t understand what is being asked of them, or understand it but don’t
want to do it, then the tactful [discret] rider will pay close attention. If the
horse understands what is asked but refuses to do it, then it must be punished
for its refusal; and if the horse doesn’t understand and its refusal is due to a
lack of intelligence produced by its anger or its stupidity, and it is being
difficult about lifting itself off the ground and folding its forelegs … or is
taking too long to lift its feet from the ground, then hit it on one or both of its
hind legs with the whip, in order to make it kick out. If [the horse] is at all
sensitive, it will realize that it must lift its legs or even its croup when it sees
the whip coming. It therefore will no longer refuse to lift its forehand, which
was what was asked in the first place. If all these methods fail, and the horse
is so stuck to the ground that it does not want to come up, then have a large
pole held about a foot and a half above the ground and, holding one of the
ropes attached to its cavesson, make the horse jump over it: when it is
getting close to the pole, have the person who will be riding it encourage it
with his voice and the whip on one of its shoulders, and by this means the
horse assuredly will learn to do a [pesade]….
360
360
“[S]i le cheval est leger & des-uny, il sera besoin que le Chevalier ayant finy sa leçon, le face
attacher entre les deux piliers. Et apres l’avoir fait aller de costé deçà & delà, qu’il descende, puis un
peu apres qu’il luy frappe doucement la poictrine avec la houssine en aidant de la langue pour luy
apprendre à faire des courbettes, à quoy si il ne respond, & qu’il n’obeïsse comme il s’en trouve de si
coleres ou si stupides que la moindre nouveauté les trouble de telle sorte, qu’ils n’entendent point ce
qu’on leur demande, ou l’entendant ne le veulent faire. A quoy le discret Chevalier prendra garde de
pres: Car si le cheval entend & comprend ce qu’il luy demande, le refusant, il le faut chastier de son
refus: si aussi il ne l’entend, & que son refus procede de manque d’intelligence produite par la colere,
ou par la stupidité, faisant difficulté de se lever haut de terre, & plier les jambes de devant … ou qu’il
se fist trop attendre à lever les deux pieds de terre, il le faut frapper sur une jambe de derriere ou sur
toutes les deux avec la mesme houssine, pour le faire ruer, & s’il est tant soit peu sensible, il
s’appercevra qu’il luy faut lever les jambes voire la croupe, en voyant approcher la houssine: De
sorte qu’il ne refusera plus à lever le devant, qui est ce que premierement est demandé, & si tous ces
moyens manquoient, & que le cheval feust tellement attache à terre qu’il ne se voulust lever, il faut
faire tenir un gros baston haut de terre, environ d’un pied & demy: & tenant une des cordes du
cavesson, faire sauter le cheval par dessus, lequel approchant du baston, ce-luy qui sera sur luy aydera
de la langue & de la houssine sur l’une ou l’autre de ses espaules: & par cette voye le cheval
apprendra asseurement à bien faire une courbette….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 46-47. In this
particular paragraph, courbette has been translated as pesade. When this passage is read in context, it
is crystal clear that Pluvinel is indeed discussing how to introduce the pesade to the horse for the first
time, in part because the passage that immediately follows addresses how to convert these initial,
“pseudo-courbettes” into real ones. Why Pluvinel uses the word courbette to refer to a movement that
clearly is in fact a pesade (or, to use his preferred term, lever devant) remains a mystery, especially
since the quality of a courbette was judged in part on the proper motion of the hind feet, whereas in a
correct pesade the hind feet were stationary.
237
Here, as always, the rider must employ his knowledge, skill, and experience, in this
case coupled with his good judgment, discretion, patience, and resolve, in order to
ascertain why the horse is doing what it is doing, to choose which method will best
correct that behavior, and to persevere if his first choice fails to achieve the desired
result.
Both Pluvinel and La Noue address teaching the pesade to the horse that is
ramingue and retif.
361
Pluvinel opines that it is usually not appropriate to teach this
type of horse to pesade, unless it is extremely heavy on its forehand (fort attaché à
terre). In such a case, teaching it to lift its forehand certainly will make it lighter, but
this must not be attempted until the horse is completely obedient about going
forward when asked and has mastered all the previous lessons.
362
La Noue is a bit more aggressive in his approach: despite his willingness to
adjust the type of pesade to the nature of the individual horse, he apparently makes
no allowance for temperaments that simply are unsuited to doing the movement at
all.
363
His remedy for the ramingue or retif highlights the need for the rider to be
able to continually adjust to the demands of the moment:
361
See p. 190 and nn. 289-290, above, for the definitions of these two types, both variations on
resistant to the rider’s leg aids.
362
“Si le cheval estoit ramingue ou retif, il n’est pas à propos de le lever, si ce n’est qu’il fust fort
attaché à terre, auquel cas encor ne le faudroit-il pas lever pour le rendre plus leger, que premierement
il ne fust obeïssant à aller an avant, & obeïr aux leçons precedentes.” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy,
48.
363
One possible exception is a horse that is too foible or that lacks the necessary physical strength, but
La Noue’s use of pronouns in this passage is so confusing that it is difficult to be sure: “[S]’il est
foible, tant plus il le luy travaillera, pensant le luy assurer avec plus de patience, & luy accroitre
l’aleine, il connoistra à la fin, que tant plus il s’y avilira & s’y deplaira tant qu’il s’y rebuttera.” P. de
la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 115. This sentence could be translated as follows: “If the
horse is weak, the rider will realize in the end that the more he works the horse, thinking to reassure it
with more patience and to increase its wind, the more it will disgrace itself and fail to please, and the
238
It is necessary to push the horse that refuses to go forward at the gallop, and
from time to time, without doing a regular [pesade], lift its forehand, and then
chase it forward in a lively fashion, using the calves, the heels, the whip, or
all of them together, prompting it to move along yet further with a pleasant
voice, as the situation requires—which in truth does little harm and has much
effect in the right time and place and when appropriately employed—
continuing without a break until [the horse] has regained its reason. Having
done that, [the rider] should ride it forward a little more while patting it, so
that, having regained its breath, it can be asked once again to lift its forehand,
to see if it will persist in its initial resistance or if it will submit entirely in
obedience. Depending on the answer, it must be treated severely, that is, if it
wants to throw itself backward in disorder, but gently, if it produces a few
good pesades with no protest.
364
Finally, La Noue and Pluvinel discuss how to handle horses whose reluctance
to learn this movement expresses itself in ways that are frankly dangerous to the
rider. Both of them address the horse that resists by rearing, or standing straight up
on its hind legs rather than bending them deeply while lifting the forehand to an
angle of no more than about forty-five degrees, which is what the horse is supposed
to be doing. As already discussed in the previous chapter, simply staying on a horse
that is rearing up to its full stature is extremely difficult, yet jumping off is not an
attractive option because of the increased height from which the rider must fall.
Most frightening of all, however, as La Noue and Pluvinel both note, is the
more discouraged it will get.” If this is indeed La Noue’s meaning, then continuing to ask this horse
to perform the pesade would be pointless.
364
“Il y faut pousser le cheval ramingue & retif au galop, & de temps en temps, sans en faire un [sic]
ordinaire, le haussant, & le chassant gaillardement, ou du gras des iambes, ou des talons, ou de la
gaule, ou de tous à la fois, l’animant à passer outre avec tout cela plaisamment de la voix, selon la
necessité qu’il en aura, qui fait peu de mal à la verité, mais beaucoup d’effect en temps & lieu, & bien
à propos employée, continuant sans intermission iusques à ce qu’il se reduise à raison, & ayant bien
fait, il le faudra conduire un peu plus avant en le caressant, à fin qu’ayant cependant repris son aleine,
on puisse l’obliger derechef à se lever, pour reconnoistre s’il persistera en sa premiere & mauvaise
volonté, ou s’il se soumettra tout à fait à l’obeïssance, & selon l’un & l’autre de ses effets, le faudra-il
gouverner severement, c’est à sçavoir, s’il s’y veut aculer, & paisiblement, s’il fait quelques bonnes
pesades sans contestation.” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 115.
239
possibility that the horse will go over backward. Although La Broue already and
quite correctly has pointed out that horses, when left to their own devices, usually
will turn to the side rather than going straight over backward, La Noue draws our
attention to two other possible scenarios: the horse that throws itself over out of
deliberate malice, which is rare but not unknown, or the horse that is pulled over
because the rider’s attempts to stay in the saddle cause him to hang on the reins and
thus make the horse lose its balance, which is all too common in such situations.
As was the case with the ramingue and the retif, Pluvinel is more
conservative than La Noue in his suggestions for coping with the rearing horse and
says that it simply is not very wise to persist in trying to teach this type of horse to
pesade:
If a horse resists by raising its forehand too high, to the point that it is in peril
of going over backward, and does not want to go forward, it would be
imprudent for [the rider] to continue asking it for the movement that is
causing this resistance. With a horse that resists in this way, one must do just
the opposite and send it forward decisively and resolutely around the pillar in
order to make it stop [rearing] and employ its forces by picking up a better
movement.
365
La Noue’s solution is to enlist the aid of two strong assistants, who will literally hold
the horse down if it tries to go too high:
There are [horses] of such evil nature that, in order to evade this lesson, they
rear so high that the rider is always in danger on them and cannot bring them
down by himself but only with the help of two stout workmen, one on each
side holding the cavesson’s two ropes in order to hold [such horses] at a
365
“[S]i un cheval se deffend de se lever par trop devant, iusques à se mettre en peril de se reverser, &
sans vouloir aller en avant, que ce seroit une imprudence à luy, de luy continuer la chose de laquelle il
se deffend. Au contraire au cheval qui prend cette deffence, il le faut fort deliberer & determiner à
l’entour du pilier pour le luy faire perdre & employer sa force à prendre une meilleure cadence.”
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 48.
240
moderate elevation, or to pull them right back down if they surpass that level.
As for the bridle, [the rider] must of necessity let [the reins] fall on their neck
as soon as they begin to go up into a rear, in no way pulling on their mouth,
so that they cannot easily go over backward, unless they do so out of sheer
malice, and so that, when they come back down, they can more easily move
forward.
366
Even with the assistance of these “deux bons ouvriers,” any rider who is
willing to attempt the pesade on a horse whose tendency is to rear so high that it is at
risk of going over backward must be brave and daring. Even more importantly, a
rider who is able to drop the reins while his horse is rearing must possess strong leg
muscles, tremendous balance, and the ability to think fast and respond decisively in
dangerous circumstances: even though it is intellectually self-evident that hanging
on the mouth of a rearing horse is the best way to pull it over backward, the human
instinct for self-preservation tells the rider to hang on to whatever happens to be
available—which in this case often is the reins. Under circumstances such as these,
it is very difficult to override instinct with logic; given the unpredictable nature of
the horse, however, this is a talent to which all riders must have instantaneous access.
La Noue deals with one final type of resistance to learning the pesade that
none of the others address: horses “that not only advance when they lift their
forehands, walking on their hind feet, but leap wildly forward, yanking the reins out
of the rider’s hands.” When dealing with this impetuous type, La Noue cautions:
366
“Il y en a encore d’autres de si mauvais naturel qu’ils se cabrent, pour fuïr l’école, si haut que le
Cavalier est tousiours en peril sur eux, & qui ne peut les reduire seul, ny sans l’aide de deux bons
ouvriers, qui tiennent l’un d’un costé, & l’autre de l’autre les deux cordes du cavesson, à fin de les
soutenir mediocrement levez, ou de les remettre tout à fait à terre s’ils outrepassent la mediocrité; car
quand à la bride, il faut par necessité qu’il le leur laisse tomber sur le col, dés aussi-tost qu’ils se
leveront pour se cabrer, à fin que n’estans point soutenus de la main, ils ne se puissent pas facilement
renverser, si ce n’est de méchanceté, & que reprenans terre, ils puissent plus aysement aller avant.” P.
de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 115.
241
In order to avoid all risk, it is necessary that [the rider] be helped by someone
knowledgeable, who can hold one of the cavesson’s ropes, as much to
prevent [the horse] from resisting as to hold it for fear that it will bolt, and
who, as it lifts its forehand, knows how to cue it with the whip by smacking it
on the forelegs, and how to make it back up if it wants to throw itself
forward. This is a very proper means to correct its vice and render it obedient
to reason.
367
In all cases, La Noue expects that the horse eventually will see the error of its ways,
will submit to the rider’s demands, and will produce a proper pesade. He is not
alone in his expectation: none of these authors allows for the possibility that their
corrections will not eventually produce the desired result. Even the forgiving
Pluvinel—the only trainer who is willing to exempt at least some horses when it
comes to mastering the pesade—is not saying, “you can try this or that method, but it
may not work.” He simply is saying that, with certain types of horses, there is no
point in bothering to try. When he does offer a corrective, he, like the others,
expects a positive outcome.
Whether the horse learned the pesade readily and with few objections, or the
learning process was a constant battle, the sources make it clear that a horse was not
expected to master this air overnight. La Broue says quite specifically at the end of
his instructions for training the horse in pesade that the rider must work “with
judgment and patience” in order to proceed “little by little and slowly, from one
367
“Et d’autant qu’il se trouve des chevaux qui ne s’avancent pas seulement en se haussans, &
marchans sur les pieds de derriere, mais qui s’élancent furieusement, forçant la main du Cavalier, il
faut pour éviter tout inconvenient, qu’il se face ayder par quelqu’un bien entendu, qui tiene l’une des
cordes du cavesson, tant pour l’empécher de s’en defendre, que pour le retenir de peur qu’il ne
l’emporte, & qu’à mesure qu’il se haussera, qui le sçache ayder de la gaule, en luy en donnant sur les
bras, & le faire reculer selon qu’il se voudra licentieusement avancer; moyen fort propre pour le
corriger de son vice, & le rendre obeïssant à la raison.” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et
italienne, 115.
242
pesade to two and from two to three …, augmenting the number … as the horse
becomes more secure …,” thus confirming beyond any doubt that the finished
movement could take many weeks of effort to achieve.
368
Based on all the above, it is clear that teaching a horse the pesade was not the
simple exercise that one initially might have supposed. All horses destined for the
more dramatic forms of manège work had to be able to do it, yet—as this chapter has
demonstrated—all of them were not equally amicable about learning it. As
evidenced by the descriptions of all the potential hazards and obstacles the rider
could expect to encounter in his quest for the perfect pesade, training a horse to do
this air certainly called upon many aspects of a nobleman’s virtue. Anyone who was
willing to ride a horse while it was being encouraged to do something that in its
natural state (the rear) is a violent defense mechanism aimed at dislodging whatever
is on its back had to be at the very least brave, strong, and willing to take risks.
Given the wide range of responses the rider might get from the various different
types of horses, he certainly needed skill, knowledge, and experience. For those
horses that were less than amenable about learning the movement, the rider also
could expect to use many of the more cerebral aspects of vertu in order to overcome
their reluctance—qualities like judgment, patience, discretion, resolve, the ability to
adapt to the needs of the moment, and the capacity to think and act with speed and
precision under perilous conditions.
368
“Continuant ceste reigle avec iugement & patience, il faudra venir peu à peu & lentement d’une
pesade à deux & de deux à trois, haultes, advancées, neantmoins legeres, augmentant le nombre & les
carresses, à mesure que le cheval s’asseurera, & qu’il consentira au temps, & aux mouvemens de la
main, & de la iambe.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:149.
243
CHAPTER 8
Vertu and the Courbette
In order to understand why the courbette was so demanding and why its
successful execution required so many of the qualities of noble vertu, it first is
necessary to understand the mechanics of the terre à terre, because the courbette
combined the motion of that movement with the elevation of the pesade. Teaching
the terre à terre entailed a set of problems entirely different from those associated
with teaching the pesade, because the terre à terre demanded a tremendous amount
of collection. As will be recalled, collection requires the horse to lower its haunches
by increasing the flexion in its hocks and bringing its hind legs further under its
body, thereby transferring more of its weight to the hind legs and lightening the
forehand. The increased flexion and engagement behind, coupled with the increased
freedom in the shoulders in front, create more “spring” in the horse’s gaits, which
makes everything that it does more elevated and expressive.
As can be seen from this description, correct collection is extremely
physically demanding and therefore requires a horse that is sufficiently active and
energetic to meet those demands. Horses with naturally active and energetic
dispositions, however, also tend to be high-spirited or “hot.” Although such a horse
will have more natural brilliance when performing a collected movement, it also is
far more likely to object to some of the other demands of collection, which requires
the horse to contain itself and to submit to its rider to a degree for which certain truly
hot-tempered horses simply will not stand.
244
A really hot horse in fact may react quite violently in an attempt to evade the
restriction, both physical and mental, of excessive collection. Today, one of the few
places where the airs above the ground are still practiced is the Spanish Riding
School in Vienna, Austria. According to Alois Podhajsky, former director of the
School, it is precisely when they are trying to avoid or evade the demands of
collection that many such horses reveal their latent potential for the high airs:
Some horses … will show a tendency to leave the ground when they are
made to place their hind legs energetically under the body…. A horse with a
lively temperament might be tempted to jump from this position, performing
a regular school jump [a high air], because he is no longer able to remain on
his bent hind legs….
369
As will be seen later in this chapter, the manuals of horsemanship used for this study
all make reference to horses that, in the course of their training, volunteer a
rudimentary form of the high air for which they have a natural predisposition. Then
as now, a horse with a “lively temperament” that objected to the restraint of
collection might respond by launching itself into the air.
As will be recalled, the terre à terre was similar to an extremely collected
canter, but with four beats rather than three and with no moment of suspension.
Since this air required the horse to be enormously collected, training some of the
hotter types to perform it must have resulted in many instances of strenuous equine
objection such as those discussed above. Coping with those objections in turn must
have provided numerous opportunities for riders to employ their knowledge,
369
Podhajsky, Complete Training of Horse and Rider, 269. In a personal conversation that the author
of this study had many years ago with Franz Rochowansky, former chief rider at the Spanish Riding
School, Rochowansky concurred that the airs above the ground in many cases are an evasion of the
discipline of high collection.
245
experience, judgment, and all the other qualities of vertu considered essential to
conquering the recalcitrant horse. The use of virtue when training the horse in terre
à terre must remain speculative, however, because most of the texts consulted say
nothing about the actual training process for this movement, and none of them says
anything about how horses of “lively temperament” reacted to that process. Pluvinel
and Menou are the only two authors to mention training the horse in terre à terre,
and even they only discuss it obliquely.
Both these authors seem to expect that, if their instructions up to this point in
the horse’s schooling have been followed correctly, the horse will simply fall into the
terre à terre on its own without benefit of any training aimed specifically at
producing it. For example, Pluvinel says that, once the young horse is working well
at the canter, “it is necessary to give it more fougue [brio, fire, liveliness] so as to
obligate it, by putting it on its haunches, to take a few strides of terre à terre on its
own….”
370
Other than telling the rider to stir his horse up and get it more engaged
behind, Pluvinel offers no explanation for how to get the horse to transition from a
regular collected canter to the terre à terre; for that matter, he does not even tell the
rider how to create more fougue in the horse. In another passage, in which Pluvinel
purportedly is going to explain how to cope with the horse that does not
spontaneously offer the terre à terre, he assures his reader that, “if a horse is light
and united, the aids described above infallibly will make it pick up that which one
370
“Lors qu’il va librement au pas & au trot … on pourra l’animer … à prendre le galop; auquel estant
asseuré luy faudra donner plus de fougue pour l’obliger en se mettant sur les hanches de manier seul,
& faire quelque temps terre à terre….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 27.
246
desires.”
371
Here again, Pluvinel is not particularly helpful in terms of what the rider
actually is supposed to do to get the horse to pick up the terre à terre. The “aids
described above” to which he refers have nothing to do with this air; in the passage
immediately preceding this one, he is discussing how to teach the young horse to
move forward or sideways off the rider’s leg. To confound matters yet further, in the
passage that follows this unhelpful statement, Pluvinel does not say anything more
about the terre à terre but segues directly into teaching the horse the pesade and the
courbette. In the end, Pluvinel thus does not tell us much, if anything, about training
the horse to perform the terre à terre.
Like Pluvinel, Menou is quite explicit in his expectation that all will proceed
smoothly, at least with the more cooperative equine types. He is slightly more
descriptive in terms of what the rider must do to cue the horse for this movement, but
he too is disappointingly vague:
If the horse is light and kind-natured, and if the rider aids it gently, as much
with the voice [and] the whip as with the calves, having his weight in the
correct place and allowing it to adapt without pushing it, without doubt [the
horse] will pick up the terre à terre….
372
Unlike the other authors, Menou rarely offers instructions for how to get a horse to
perform a specific maneuver, let alone advice on what to do if it fails to respond as
371
“[S]i le cheval est leger & uny: infailliblement les aydes cy-dessus dites, le feront presenter à ce
qu’on desire….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 46.
372
“[S]i le Cheval est leger & gentil, & que l’homme l’anime doucement, tant de la voix, de la gaule,
que du gras de la jambe, ayant le contrepoids du corps en bon lieu, & le laissant accommoder sans le
presser, sans doute il se presentera à prendre la cadence terre à terre….” Menou, Pratique du
cavalier, 38.
247
expected. In this case, however, he does at least offer one corrective for the horse
that does not simply “se presenter” the first time it is asked for this movement:
If the horse resists, it must be followed [by someone on foot] with a whip,
and when he gives it a smack with this whip, then the person who is riding it
must simultaneously give it a smack with his own whip as well as cue it with
his voice, all at the same time, so that [the horse] will think that all of that
came from the person on its back.
373
How, precisely, this will make the horse pick up the terre à terre remains a mystery,
but it is Menou’s only suggestion.
Pluvinel, on the other hand, goes into considerably more detail about the
various reasons why a horse might not spontaneously volunteer the terre à terre, and
he covers at least some of the ways in which the rider should respond:
There are horses that, although they are obedient to the hand and leg aids and
allow themselves to be ridden at the walk, trot, canter, and full gallop,
nonetheless cannot pick up the terre à terre. What prevents them (and here I
refer to the obedient ones, because those that resist out of malice must be
vanquished by skillful patience and judicious resolve in order to make them
obey), but being obedient, if they will not adapt to any movement, then they
must be without strength, without lightness, or naturally disunited….
374
In other words, there are four situations in which a horse might fail or refuse to pick
up the terre à terre: if it is malicious and disobedient or, being obedient, if it is sans
force, sans legereté, or naturally des-uny.
373
“Si … le Cheval se deffendoit, il faudroit le faire suivre avec la chambriere; & lors qu’on luy
donneroit le coup de chambriere, il seroit besoin que l’homme qui est dessus luy donnast en mesme
temps de la gaule & de la voix tout ensemble, pour luy faire iuger que cela vient de celuy qui est
dessus.” Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 39.
374
“[I]l y a des chevaux encor qu’ils obeïssent à la main & aux talons, s’y laissant conduire au pas, au
trot, au galop, & à toute bride: neantmoins ils ne peuvent prendre la cadence terre à terre: & ce qui
les empesche (i’entens les obeïssans) car pour ceux qui se deffendent de malice, il faut les vaincre par
la patience industrieuse, & par la resolution iudicieuse, afin de les faire obeyr: & ou estans obeïssans,
[s’]ils ne s’accommoderoient à aucune cadance. Il faut qu’ils soient sans force, sans legereté ou
naturellement des-unis….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 45-46.
248
The first case sounds like it would include a hot horse objecting to the
restrictions of collection, but Pluvinel says only that the rider must employ “skillful
patience” and “judicious resolve” to get the horse to obey. Although this does not
tell us much about what the rider actually is supposed to do, as discussed in the
previous chapter, Pluvinel considers patience and resolve to represent opposite ends
of the spectrum between gentleness and severity, easiness and force, asking and
demanding. If that premise is applied here, then he is saying that the rider must use
his skill and judgment to strike a balance between these two opposites. Precisely
how he is supposed to do that remains cloaked in mystery, but the general concept in
fact makes total sense when dealing with a horse whose “hot” temperament clashes
with the need to submit to the restraint of collection.
As for the other three cases, Pluvinel goes on to explain what to do if the
horse is “leger & des-uny.” His solution is to put it between the pillars and teach it
first to raise its forehand and then to kick out with its hind legs. Given the nature of
the solution, it appears that this technique is intended to make the horse “uny” rather
than to get it to pick up the terre à terre, as it is difficult to imagine how teaching the
horse to lift its forehand, let alone its haunches, would in any way make it more
likely to offer the terre à terre. In fact, Pluvinel never mentions the terre à terre
again in this passage, nor does he ever return to what the rider should do about
horses that fail to pick up the air because they are insufficiently strong or light.
375
375
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 46-50.
249
Although Pluvinel and Menou are the only two authors to touch on the
training process for the terre à terre, several authors mention it in the context of
more complex maneuvers such as voltes or passades. Today, a volte is simply a
circle with a diameter of eight meters or less. When these men were riding and
writing, however, the volte usually was performed on two tracks: instead of the hind
feet following in the footsteps of the front feet, as they would in a simple circle, the
hind feet made a smaller circle while the front feet made a slightly larger one, thus
creating two separate “tracks” for the front and hind feet. Then as now, the hind feet
had to maintain the rhythm of whatever gait the horse was in: their steps might be
smaller, but they were no fewer than if the horse were traveling in a straight line.
Finally, since in this position the horse was moving at an angle, the outside leg in
both pairs of legs, but especially the front ones because of the larger circumference
of their circle, had to briefly cross over the inside one in each stride.
376
For those
familiar with the upper-level movements of modern competitive dressage, the
seventeenth-century volte at the walk would have been similar or identical to the turn
on the haunches or walk pirouette; the volte at the trot would have been essentially a
very small circle performed in travers (haunches-in); and the volte at the canter or in
the terre à terre would have ranged from a small circle in travers all the way down
to a true canter pirouette, depending on the circumference of the circle made by the
376
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 2:57-58, gives a particularly detailed description of the volte; see
also Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 135-138; Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 52, 136, 164.
250
hind feet.
377
Finally, the volte also could be performed in the mesair or the
courbette, which were simply more elevated variations on the terre à terre; the
pattern of footfalls was the same. The volte en mesair and the volte à courbettes
have no equivalent in modern dressage.
The passade also has no modern equivalent; there is, in fact, no movement
today that even resembles it, possibly because the demands it places on the horse are
so high. La Broue, Pluvinel, and Delcampe all remark on the difficulty of this
movement, and their reasoning becomes clear once they explain its intricacies.
Based on their descriptions, coupled with the definitions provided by Guillet, the
basic passade goes something like this: The horse begins from a standing start and
takes off at a full gallop for a short distance in a straight line; this is the actual
“passade” portion of the movement. The horse then performs what sounds like the
sliding stop one sees in modern reining competitions; in this movement, it basically
sits down on its hind legs and slides to a stop with its forelegs suspended in the air
for the duration of the slide. Then—and this is where the difficulty comes in—the
horse transitions in an instant from the mental and physical frame of full gallop and
sliding stop to that of extreme collection, and performs at minimum a demi-volte
377
Recent research using stop-motion photography and slow-motion video shows dissociation of fore
and hind legs in the modern canter pirouette: the motion of the pirouette makes it impossible for the
horse to maintain the 1-2-3 rhythm of a true canter, so the hind feet complete their stride before the
front feet do, resulting in a four-beat rhythm (1-2, 3-4). This means that the modern “canter”
pirouette is in fact a pirouette in terre à terre, a movement that has otherwise vanished from modern
dressage. For examples of this research, see Hilary Clayton, “Seeing is Believing: How Slow-Motion
Replay Photography Has Impacted Our Understanding of Dressage Mechanics,” Dressage Today,
October 2005, 42-45; David Collins, “Illusions of Pirouettes,” Dressage Today, December 2005, 52-
58. Clayton holds the McPhail Dressage Chair in Equine Sports Medicine at Michigan State
University’s College of Veterinary Medicine and has researched and published extensively on equine
biomechanics. Colllins is a professional equine photographer.
251
(half pirouette) in collected canter, terre à terre, mesair, or courbette. Depending on
the type of passade, it may be asked to pirouette for an additional revolution or two
(the volte redoublée), or to perform several additional strides of its air in place (ferme
à ferme) before and after the volte(s), or possibly even both. Sometimes the volte
phase sounds similar to the roll-back performed by the modern reining horse, which
would not be so extraordinary: in a roll-back, the horse simply spins its forehand
180 degrees around its stationary hind legs; the forelegs never touch the ground, and
the hind feet basically turn in place. In most cases, however, the voltes are true
pirouettes, in which the horse is expected to turn in several highly collected strides of
whatever air the rider has chosen, marking correct time with both front and hind feet
in each stride. Once the horse has completed the volte phase (whatever its
composition), it then takes off again at full speed and repeats the entire process, this
time performing the volte(s) at the end of the passade in the opposite direction. The
horse continues to go back and forth, cycling rapidly between extreme extension and
extreme collection, as long as its wind and strength permits.
378
In the passade, the
only time the terre à terre would come into play was during the volte phase. As
noted, however, voltes equally well could be performed in the mesair or the
courbette. Because of their similarities, the authors often clump these airs together
378
For descriptions of the passade, see Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 87-93; Delcampe, Art de monter
à cheval, 55-56, 146-164; Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 101-103. Both Delcampe and Guillet
define several different varieties of passade. Pluvinel says that the expected number of passes is at
least three or four but no more than five. La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 2:46-47, confirms that a
correctly performed passade requires a horse with a combination of abilities “qui ne se trouvent pas
souvent ensemble”; he then describes the movement and lists all the reasons why horses that lack the
necessary skill set find it so difficult to perform. In so doing, he underscores the fact that a horse with
the ability to alternate rapidly and repeatedly between the explosive and the restricted is very rare.
252
when discussing voltes and passades, thereby making it even more difficult to tease
information specifically about the terre à terre out of their texts.
La Broue, La Noue, and Pluvinel are the authors who specifically discuss the
terre à terre in the context of voltes or passades or both, and sometimes in other
contexts as well.
379
Delcampe mentions the terre à terre only in passing, and
Menou—aside from the “training” passage cited above—does not mention it much at
all. Delcampe refers to the terre à terre only in the two pages of his text where he
defines the various airs relevés. Even then he mentions it merely as a foil for other
higher airs, the “plus relevé que terre à terre” and the “mes-air ou moitié air,” both of
which have the same motion as the terre à terre but are slightly more elevated.
380
As
for Menou’s treatise, there are six chapters that utilize voltes and one on passades
relevées. For the voltes, either Menou stipulates that they are to be performed in the
courbette or he says (here referring to the horse) only that they are to be in “son air”
or “sa cadence,” which might be the terre à terre but might be something else
entirely, depending on the horse’s natural preference. For the passades, Menou does
not indicate one way or the other what the horse is supposed to be doing in the
379
La Broue makes occasional reference to this air in Book 1 of his Cavalerice françois; in Book 2, he
makes frequent reference to it in multiple chapters on teaching voltes to every possible type of horse
with every possible type of temperament. La Noue discusses the use of the terre à terre in the voltes
of passades in Part 2 of his Cavalerie françoise et italienne; in Part 3, he addresses its use with the
airs relevés. Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 86-97 passim, discusses the terre à terre on the demi-volte,
the volte, and the volte redoublée in passades.
380
Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 190-191.
253
voltes, although the use of the word relevée would tend to indicate voltes à
courbettes rather than voltes terre à terre.
381
The absence of the terre à terre from these two texts does not mean,
however, that their authors did not use it or advocate its use just as much as the other
three. As already stated, the courbette combined the motion of the terre à terre with
the elevation of the pesade. The likelihood that all manège horses needed to master
the pesade already has been established; as will be seen shortly, it is equally likely
that they all needed to master the courbette as well. Although technically one
probably could teach a horse the courbette without having first taught it the terre à
terre, it would be far easier to teach the horse the basic motion of the air first and
then to add the elevation afterward. That being the case, we can deduce with relative
certainty that most if not all manège horses were expected to master the terre à terre.
In contrast to the terre à terre, the courbette gets considerable attention from
all these horsemen. All of the sources consulted—the dictionary as well as the five
manuals of horsemanship—consider it to be an air relevé. It was viewed, however,
as the least demanding of the high airs for the horse to perform. La Broue and La
Noue explicitly identify the courbette as the easiest of these airs: La Broue calls it
“the least violent and most common,” while La Noue says it is both “the least
381
Menou, Pratique du cavalier, pt. 2, chaps. 1-5, 10, 12. Guillet and Pluvinel are the only other
authors who use the term passades relevées, and they both indicate that the voltes in this movement
are to be performed in the courbette; see Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 102; Pluvinel, Instruction
du Roy, 90-93.
254
difficult and violent” and the air that “works the horse the least.”
382
This assessment
supports the supposition that the courbette—like the pesade and the terre à terre—
was a movement that most if not all manège horses were expected to master. In this
case, however, the evidence is more concrete and less deductive.
La Noue says that “courbettes are no less necessary to the horse that is
capable of them than they are agreeable to the rider interested in being well viewed
in good places,”
383
thus indicating that any horse that possessed the physical capacity
to perform this air was expected to do so. La Broue does not say explicitly that all
manège horses are expected to be able to perform the courbette, but the amount of
detail he offers on how to get problematic horses to do it, coupled with the fact that
he considers only three types of horse to be simply unsuited for it, suggests very
strongly that this was indeed the expectation. Similarly, La Noue makes no explicit
statement about the courbette being a “requirement,” but he discusses at considerable
length how to teach this movement to horses that are reluctant to learn for various
reasons, and there is only one type of horse that he says should not be taught the
courbette at all.
384
In the texts of Pluvinel, Menou, and Delcampe, the expectation that all
manège horses must be able to do the courbette is more implicit. Delcampe’s
description of the training process for this movement, for example, not only is quite
382
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:140; P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 112, 116,
respectively.
383
“[L]es courbettes ne sont pas moins necessaires au cheval qui en est capable, qu’agreables au
Cavalier curieux de se faire voir en bons lieux….” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne,
118.
384
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:148-151; P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 113,
116-120.
255
brief but also seems to assume that the horse will be both able and willing to do it:
he does not even discuss how to handle the horse that cannot or will not.
385
The
other evidence for these three authors is even more oblique, as it has to do more with
what they do not say than with what they do. For example, all these horsemen freely
and repeatedly acknowledge that only some horses are able to perform the capriole
and its related forms (the croupade, the balotade, and un pas et un saut), whereas
they say nothing of the sort about the courbette. Menou and Pluvinel also make a
number of comparative remarks that suggest that most horses were expected to
master the courbette: they talk about how much more difficult it is to work with
horses that are naturally gifted for the capriole than to work with those that are
capable only of the courbette or the terre à terre, or how one can force a horse—
even a tired horse—to do these lower airs but not to do the truly high ones.
386
A final piece of evidence supporting the supposition that all manège horses
had to be able to perform the courbette is the fact that so many other movements
could not be performed properly—or at least in their most “perfect” form—without
it. For example, voltes, both on their own and in passades, could be performed in the
collected canter, the terre à terre, and the mesair, but they were considered to be
more elegant and desirable when executed in the more elevated and difficult
385
Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 167-169; see n. 405, below, for the full quote.
386
For example, after describing the temperament typical of horses that are suited for the capriole,
Pluvinel says that it is “beaucoup plus difficile de les reduire à la raison, que ceux qui n’ont qu’une
force suffisante pour le terre à terre, & pour les courbettes…. [O]n ne peut forcer un cheval de sauter
…; & par consequent … il faut que le prudent Chevalier travaille à l’air des capreoles avec beaucoup
plus de iugement, de patience, & d’invention, qu’aux autres où il peut forcer son cheval….”
Elsewhere, he says that “l’air des capreoles ne se doit, ny ne se peut forcer comme les autres airs de
terre à terre, & de courbettes.” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 132-133, 129, respectively. Menou,
Pratique du cavalier, 137-138, 143, makes similar statements.
256
courbette. Pluvinel tells his pupil, Louis XIII, that “the horse adjusted in all respects
at the courbette and the terre à terre … can be called perfectly trained and very
worthy of serving Your Majesty.”
387
Since this statement indicates that manège
horses that were not so “adjusted” were considered to be neither dressé nor digne de
servir, we may safely conclude that those that were retained for manège work had to
be able to do the courbette, not to mention the terre à terre. Like the pesade and the
terre à terre, then, the courbette was so fundamental to the practice of manège riding
that horses that failed to grasp its intricacies almost certainly were relegated to less
demanding pursuits.
Because the courbette was essentially a more elevated variant of the terre à
terre, it required just as much collection and all its attendant restrictions as the lower
air. La Broue says that “courbettes … are executed with a restricted order, by
keeping [the horse] subjugated….”
388
La Noue concurs, stating that “courbettes are
performed with a submissive and restrained action and with a precisely beaten and
restricted order and measure.”
389
On the other hand, the courbette was substantially
more elevated than the terre à terre—almost, but not quite, as elevated as the pesade.
Unlike the pesade, however, the courbette required the horse to raise its forehand,
not just once, but over and over again. To perform this movement correctly, the
horse therefore needed even more innate energy and spirit than it did for either the
387
“[L]e cheval ajusté de tout point à courbettes & terre à terre … se peut dire parfaitement dressé &
tres-digne de servir V.M….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 113.
388
“[Les] courbettes … se font en le tenant subiect, & par un ordre limité….” La Broue, Cavalerice
françois, 1:150.
389
“[L]es courbettes se font par une action subjette & retenuë, & par un ordre & mesure iustement
battue & limitée.” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 113.
257
pesade or the terre à terre. In short, the horse needed precisely the type of
temperament that would be least likely to acquiesce to the mental and physical
restrictions of extreme collection.
Training a horse to courbette thus would have been fraught with problems
related to balancing the discipline and submission needed for the movement’s
collected aspects against the inherent exuberance of a horse with a disposition
suitable for its elevated aspects. La Noue states that that is precisely the case:
[Horses] that will indulge themselves naturally in the sprightly airs … have
an inclination that originates in nothing but a certain liveliness, enemy of
severity, … which means that these kind and sensitive souls can only submit
to the precision of the high airs with time, patience, and well practiced
skill.
390
In other words, horses with the bold and lively disposition needed for the airborne
portions of an air relevé are so sensitive that they will have difficulty accepting the
restriction and precision—the “severity,” as La Noue puts it—of its collected
portions. Given the conflicting demands of the courbette, there must have been
many instances during the process of getting a horse to the fully trained state when
the innate liveliness required for the repeated lifting of the forehand clashed rather
violently with the submissive nature required for extreme collection. Certainly La
Noue’s statement that teaching this type of air to a horse will require a great deal of
the rider’s time, will test his patience, and will call heavily on his skill, knowledge,
and experience supports this contention.
390
“[Les chevaux] qui se porteront naturellement aux airs gaillards, … ont d’inclination, qui ne
procede que d’une certaine gaillardise, ennemye de severité, … qui fait que ces esprits si gentils &
sensibles, ne se peuvent assubjettir à la iustesse des airs relevez, qu’avec le temps, la patience, & la
science bien prattiquée.” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 112.
258
And indeed, several of the manuals of horsemanship devote page after page
to this very issue. They cover virtually every resistance that the recalcitrant horse
may offer when being trained to courbette, as well as a mind-boggling array of
corrections that the rider is expected to have at his disposal. La Broue and La Noue
both are exceptionally detailed on this issue, so much so that extensive quoting
would be prohibitive in length. Their texts therefore will be summarized, in order to
give at least a sense of their coverage.
La Broue begins with the ideal horse, one with “such good contact, such a
kind nature, and so light, that one easily will be able to put it in the air of
courbettes.” He then describes in detail how the rider is to achieve this, as well as
how to teach this cooperative type the courbette on the volte, the change of hand in
the courbette through the volte, and the courbette on the voltes of passades.
391
Immediately following this idyllic passage, however, La Broue is quick to tell his
reader:
For every horse that will succeed [at the courbette] via the lessons explained
above, there will be a hundred of a different nature, that at the beginning will
flatly refuse the above-referenced rules; but for all of that, one must not stop
trying, using the best means of the art [of horsemanship], because many times
one sees a horse that was extremely resistant to good schooling, but that
nonetheless surrendered in the end, working well and very easily.
392
391
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:140-144. The passage from which the brief quote is drawn reads
in its entirety: “[I]l se pourra trouver aucunefois [des chevaux] de si bon appuy, de si gentille nature,
& si leger, que facilement on le pourra mettre à l’air des courbettes … sur le trot, sans l’arrester, ou
sur le petit galop, le retenant par un doux appuy, & l’esveillant gayement du son de la langue, luy
aidant aussi de la pointe de la gaule sur l’espaule, pour luy faire relever peu à peu, & sans violence,
les temps de ce galop, cependant qu’on les racoursira, & soustiendra à loisir, par le moyen de certains
arrests longs, aysez, & attendus, propres à la legeresse du cheval.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois,
1:140-141.
392
“Pour un cheval, qui reüssira facilement par les leçons cy-devant expliquées, il y en aura cent de
differente nature, qui au commencement refuseront tout à fait les susdites reigles: mais pour cela il ne
259
Given sufficient skill, knowledge, experience, time, and persistence, the rider thus
has at least a reasonable hope of success. With that prognosis in mind, La Broue
then proceeds to discuss how to teach the courbette to various problem horses: the
one that is heavy on the forehand, which may also lean on the bit; the one that simply
has no talent for this air; the horse that has bad and painful feet; the horse that is
fingard, ramingue, or retif—that is, so resistant to the leg that it refuses to go
forward and may back up or even buck and kick when asked to do so; the spirited,
sensitive, and resolute horse; and the impatient and anxious horse, which comes in
two subvarieties: the choleric, sanguine, violent, and superbly spirited, or the
melancholy, malicious, fearful, and timid.
Of these seven types, La Broue says that three should not be taught the
courbette at all. If the horse has so little natural inclination for the air that the trainer
must resort to “bitter and tiring lessons” (leçons aspres & fatiguables) to force it to
perform, then there is no point. If the horse has sore feet, then the pain it will
experience as it goes up and down in this air will cause it to perform badly, so no
matter what other qualities the horse has that might make it good at this movement,
there again is no point. Finally, the courbette is totally unsuitable for any horse
whose predilection is to refuse to move forward; this type of horse already wants to
withhold its power and boldness (ses forces & son courage), so asking it to perform
a movement that requires it to restrain itself will merely encourage its vice.
faudra laisser de les rechercher par les bons moyens de l’art, car aucunefois on void le cheval, qui
s’est extremement defendu à la bonne escole, qui neautmoins [sic] s’est à la fin rendu, bien maniant &
fort aysé.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:148.
260
Of the remaining four, the horse that is heavy on the forehand or that hangs
on the bit is relatively easy to correct: all that is needed is to lighten the horse by
engaging its haunches prior to asking for the courbette. This can be achieved by
halting it, by backing it for a few steps, or—if the horse is exceptionally heavy—by
putting it on a downhill slope so it is forced to sit down on its hind legs. The
spirited, sensitive, and resolute horse is better suited to military service than to
courbettes, because “its anxieties usually deprive it of memory and obedience, so
that most often, instead of maintaining a clear and exact beat, it will merely hop its
forefeet up and down … out of spite and rage.” This hopping is both highly
disagreeable and very difficult to correct, but La Broue explains in detail how this
type can be taught the courbette if the trainer has the necessary skill, experience, and
patience. Of the two types of anxious and impatient horses, each poses its own
particular set of problems and both are hard to correct. The anxiety and impatience
of the overly spirited horse can be overcome, however, with sufficient time, patience,
and correct training; here again, La Broue explains in detail what must be done. The
anxiety and impatience of the cowardly horse, on the other hand, are more difficult
to surmount: if the trainer is too insistent in his corrections, it may become
overwhelmed and discouraged; but if he is too gentle and respectful, it may take
advantage and become even more resistant.
393
Teaching this last type the courbette
393
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:149-151; quote from 1:150. La Broue closes this passage with
some general instructions for teaching the courbette; he then dedicates two chapters to teaching
various types of problem horses the courbette on the volte, the change of hand in the courbette
through the volte, and the courbette on the voltes of passades; see Cavalerice françois, 1:151-158.
See also the multiple chapters on teaching voltes in Book 2 of Cavalerice françois, which discuss
261
clearly is something of a balancing act, but La Broue does not say that it is
impossible—assuming, of course, that the rider has sufficient skill, knowledge,
experience, and judgment to find the appropriate balance.
Like La Broue, La Noue addresses several different categories of horses and
their various likely ways of avoiding the rider’s efforts to teach them the courbette.
La Noue begins with the horse that refuses to move forward and agrees with La
Broue that the trainer “should abstain entirely from presenting [courbettes] to the
cheval fingard,” because “once it has gotten a taste of this air that will facilitate the
means to hold itself firm in one place in order to resist the will of the rider,” its
particular form of resistance will simply become more pronounced. La Noue then
gives detailed instructions for other methods that will correct this horse’s bad
habit.
394
It is unclear, both here and in La Broue’s text, what the fate of this type of
horse will be: given the importance of the courbette in various other maneuvers, if it
never will be able to master this air, its future as a manège horse would seem
dubious, but neither author addresses that issue.
teaching the courbette in that context to horses of diverse temperaments. P. de la Noue, Cavalerie
françoise et italienne, 112-113, echoes much of what La Boue has to say about training the two types
of anxious and impatient horse, but he views them as problematic not just for the courbette but for
“toute sorte d’airs hauts & gaillards” (Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 112).
394
“[I]l s’abstiendra tout à faict de les presenter au cheval fingard, d’autant que ne cherchant
naturellement qu’à s’acculer, qu’il s’y feroit si entier, qu’il n’y auroit-pas moyen de le mener par le
droit, ny de le mettre sur les voltes, ny au pas, ny au trot, & encore moins au galop, apres qu’il auroit
une fois gousté cét air qui luy faciliteroit le moyen de se retenir ferme en une place pour se defendre
de la volonté du Cavalier, au lieu de partir determinément & vigoureusement de la main…. [L]es
courbettes sont en tout & par tout tellement convenables à son vice, qu’on ne luy sçauroit donner
quelque leçon plus propre à le luy inveterer, à cause que les courbettes se font par une action subjette
& retenuë, & par un ordre & mesure iustement battue & limitée.” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise
et italienne, 113. Elsewhere, he reiterates: “[I]l n’y a air plus convenable au mauvais naturel du
cheval ramingue que les courbettes.” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 134.
262
La Noue then discusses how to introduce the courbette to the cooperative
horse, after which he returns to the more problematic types. First, he addresses the
horse that is hot-tempered, quick to react, impatient, anxious, and sensitive, yet is
also so stubborn and heavy on the forehand (terragnol; literally, attached to the
ground) that it will not lift its forehand properly. This horse hops its forefeet up and
down instead of rising and falling in the correct rhythm and resists the aids by
throwing itself backward. La Noue offers three increasingly severe levels of
correction corresponding to incrementally more resistant behaviors on the part of this
type of horse, all of which involve sending it vigorously forward before asking for
the courbette. Next, he discusses the horse that is heavy on the forehand, which
comes in two main varieties: the one that has a light contact with the bit and that, at
the halt, is free and correct in its head and neck; and the one that hangs on the bit, is
heavy in the hand, and carries all its weight in its shoulders. Like La Broue, La
Noue’s solution is to lighten this horse by engaging its haunches, and he suggests
precisely the same means: halt, back up, or use a slope, the corrective again
cascading in intensity according to the degree of heaviness.
La Noue then addresses the horse that is hot-tempered, quick to react,
impatient, and anxious, which hops its forefeet up and down. Initially, this horse
sounds quite a bit like the first type of horse, but in fact it is not: it resorts to this
hopping motion not because it is so heavy on the forehand that it is reluctant to lift its
forefeet at all (as is the case with the first horse) but because it lacks the strength and
engagement to sustain the proper rhythm and so lifts its forefeet too readily and
263
brings them back to the ground too soon. If it is going to resist the rider’s aids, it is
more likely to refuse to turn (se faire entier) than to fling itself in reverse. The
remedy in this case is for the rider to support the horse strongly with his hand once it
has lifted its forehand, holding it in that position for as long as possible. This will
increase its engagement, which in turn will build up its strength and balance, which
in turn will allow it to courbette properly. La Noue outlines the finer points of this
rather complex technique in considerable detail and then moves on to the horse that
is impatient but free and responsive (bien dégourdy; literally, not numb or deadened)
in the forehand and obedient to the hand and leg aids.
It is not entirely clear what sort of undesirable behavior this horse indulges
in, but La Noue discourses at length on how to handle this type. His solution is
essentially to put the horse between a pair of pillars and tie it to them using two cords
attached on either side of its cavesson, although he arrives at that end in a very
roundabout way. First he suggests the use of two knowledgeable assistants (“deux
hommes stylez en cét affaire”) who basically will act as living pillars; then he says
that, if one is riding in the open and such assistance is unavailable, one can use two
trees to achieve the same thing; only at the very end of this passage, after arguing at
length for the benefits of this method, does he reveal that a pair of pillars will serve
the same function:
With this method, I arrive easily at my goal …, which has made me come to
the defense of those who make use in the city of pillars, instead of trees,
264
having [myself] experienced with them in many locales and with various
subjects many good results in all sorts of airs and manèges.
395
The use of pillars was somewhat controversial in La Noue’s day (Pluvinel and
Menou also defend them at length), which may explain why he introduces them in
such an oblique fashion.
The last type of horse that La Noue presents actually is one he already has
discussed, the horse that is heavy on the forehand; this time, however, he talks about
how to correct this horse by using the pillars. The horse is secured between them via
cords attached to either side of its cavesson, the lengths of which are dictated by the
horse’s temperament: heavy and sleepy, hot-tempered and quick to react, or gay and
lively. Much as was the case with the corrections suggested the first time this horse
was discussed, the use of the cords as a supplemental aid is dictated by the degree of
its heaviness. If the horse is relatively light and free in its contact with the bit, La
Noue stops the horse and asks it to lift its forehand before it hits the limit of the
cords, “to show [the horse] that it is not at all my intention to make it suffer any
unpleasantness….”
396
For the horse that is heavy or leans on the bit, La Noue adjusts
the timing of his aids—and thus the extent to which he allows his mount to hit the
limit of the cords—based on the degree to which it hangs on his hands. When
dealing with a horse that is extremely heavy or that sticks out its nose, he does not
395
“[P]ar cette prattique i’en viens facilement à bout …; ce qui m’a fait soussigner à la defence de
ceux qui se servent en ville de piliers, au lieu d’arbres, pour en avoir éprouvé en plusieurs endroits, &
divers sujets beaucoup de bons effets en toutes sortes d’airs & de maneges.” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie
françoise et italienne, 118.
396
“… pour luy témoigner que ce n’est point mon dessein de luy en faire recevoir aucun déplaisir….”
P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 120.
265
cue the horse until just before it is ready to hit the limit of the cords, so that, if it fails
to respond immediately, it will walk into the restriction and effectively punish itself
for its disobedience. Here again, La Noue is proposing a series of increasingly
severe corrections, calibrated to counter the corresponding degree of resistance in a
given type of horse.
397
In all of these possible scenarios that the rider may encounter when training
horses to courbette, La Noue repeatedly stresses that he must employ his knowledge,
skill, experience, and especially his judgment: to assess the nature of the horse and
its particular form of resistance, to identify the technique most likely to counter that
specific resistance in that specific type of horse, and then to execute that technique in
a judicious fashion.
Perhaps because his text is structured as a dialog rather than as a
straightforward treatise, Pluvinel generally is less precise than either La Broue or La
Noue in his approach to training the horse to courbette. For example, rather than
saying categorically that a certain type of horse is unsuited to this air, he merely says
to Louis XIII: “Your Majesty could perhaps believe that it is a very small thing for a
horse to know how to do a good courbette, but I can assure him that one that does it
well is very advanced….”
398
This implies that there are horses that do not do it well,
even perhaps that there are horses that do not (for whatever reason) do it at all, but
397
P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 116-120. In the passage immediately following
this one, La Noue discusses teaching the horse to courbette on voltes redoublées as part of passades;
he assumes, however, that at this point the horse is doing the courbette well, so his corrections mainly
have to do with the volte itself; see P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 120-124.
398
“Vostre Majesté pourroit peut-estre croire que ce seroit fort peu de chose au cheval que de sçavoir
une bonne courbette: mais ie la puis asseurer que celuy qui la fait bonne, est fort advancé….”
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 48.
266
that is by no means clear. Pluvinel also is far more vague than La Broue and La
Noue in terms of the various types of horse a trainer may encounter in his quest for
the perfect courbette and how he should approach each of those types. Instead,
Pluvinel tends to focus on a particular type of horse exhibiting a particular behavior
or on a particular training technique, sometimes without even connecting the two and
almost always ignoring the possibility that different types of horse might not indulge
in the former or respond to the latter. For example, he begins by explaining how to
convert pesades into courbettes and then intimates that he is going to cover a variety
of possible resistances by stating that the rider must consider why the horse is
resisting. Instead, he embarks on a lengthy discussion of a single type of resistance
in a single type of horse: the one that moves forward readily and is light and
vigorous but that resists its initial lessons in the courbette by offering some form of
air relevé. Pluvinel says that such an offer should not be punished, as that might
stifle the horse’s natural inclinations, and he points out that horses that do this and
that also lack the strength to continue in whatever high air they have offered
eventually will drop back down into the courbette anyway.
399
Other than this single,
highly specific case, however, Pluvinel does not discuss how the rider should handle
other types of resistance, nor even what he should do in the event that his horse
offers a high air but is not forward, light, or vigorous, and all he has to say about the
horse that does have the strength to continue in the higher air is that “such a vigorous
and fiery horse could perform a thousand disorderly behaviors which … could bring
399
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 51-52; see n. 425, below, for the full quote.
267
a thousand unpleasant accidents as much to its rider as to itself….”
400
On how the
rider is supposed to respond to those behaviors in order to prevent such accidents,
Pluvinel remains mute.
Pluvinel then embarks on his defense of pillars as a training tool, after which
he proposes his favorite technique for getting the horse to take a proper contact with
the bit while in courbette, but only after stipulating that this method is only for a
horse that neither leans nor pulls on the cavesson. He then embarks on a lengthy
description of the technique, but he never explains what the trainer should do when
faced with a horse that does lean or pull on the cavesson, which—given the concern
that both La Broue and La Noue express about exactly such horses—some of them
certainly did. Based on Pluvinel’s description of the technique in question, which
involves working the horse between the pillars with a string or thread (filet) in its
mouth rather than a bit, a horse that leaned or pulled would immediately break this
device, thus rendering his technique useless for getting this type to accept a proper
contact. Next he covers his method for reintroducing the volte to the horse now that
it has learned the courbette. He waxes quite lyrical on all the benefits of this
technique, but at the end of his lengthy description of it, he says that only one type of
horse will really benefit: “This lesson … [is] very necessary … when one sees a
horse lacking resolve in sustaining itself in the courbette, ill assured in its cadence,
400
“[T]el cheval vigoureux & plein de feu, pourroit faire mille desordres, qui … apporteroit mille
accidents facheux tant à l’homme qu’à luy….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 52.
268
uncertain in its contact and unsure of the aids….”
401
Otherwise, Pluvinel says, there
is no need to use it. He says nothing about all the other categories of horse the
trainer might encounter at this point in the schooling process or what techniques
might be appropriate to correct their variant foibles.
402
Later in his text, Pluvinel returns to training the horse to courbette on the
volte. He begins by addressing the horse that spontaneously offers the movement, a
response that Pluvinel seems to expect far more often than most of his colleagues.
His pupil, Louis XIII, is quick to point out, however, that in fact this probably does
not happen very often: “If the horse does not volunteer on its own as you desire,
what needs to be done? For there must be many horses that do not offer all by
themselves.”
403
This is one of the few instances in which Pluvinel follows at least
somewhat the format of La Broue and La Noue: he clearly connects the
disobedience to the corrective, and he describes three increasingly severe means to
get the horse to perform. He does not differentiate, however, between types of
horses, their possible forms of disobedience, or their potential responses to these
means; he seems to assume that all horses will resist in the same way and that
therefore any horse, of whatever temperament or inclination, will produce the desired
result if the rider adheres to his corrections, simply stepping up the severity if the
401
“[C]ette leçon … [est] tres-necessaire … quand on verra un cheval manquer de resolution,
s’entretenant sur ses courbettes, non asseuré de sa cadance, incertain de son appuy & des aydes….”
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 55.
402
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 50-55. For additional discussion of courbettes on the demi-volte, the
volte, and the volte redoublée in passades relevées, see Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 86-97.
403
“[S]i le cheval ne se presentoit de luy-mesme comme vous desirez, que faudra-il faire? Car il y
peut avoir beaucoup de chevaux qui ne se presenteront pas d’eux-mesmes.” Pluvinel, Instruction du
Roy, 101.
269
horse does not respond immediately. Given that the harshest corrective is to give the
horse a sharp kick and then ask for the movement again, which is unlikely to have
provoked the desired result in the vast majority of horses, one does wonder what
happened to horses that failed to respond as expected. Pluvinel does not, however,
address that possibility.
404
Delcampe is even rosier in his expectations when training the horse to
courbette. He does not discuss the possibility that some horses cannot, will not, or
ought not to do it, and, in the few pages he devotes to teaching this movement, he
makes no allowance for anything more than the most minor and temporary resistance
on the part of the horse.
405
In the slightly longer section on training the horse to
courbette on the volte, Delcampe again restricts himself to a simple explanation of
how to teach this maneuver without any discussion of what the trainer is to do if his
approach does not work.
406
Menou is even more of an anomaly than Delcampe: he quite simply does not
discuss the training process for the courbette. Menou seems to assume that the horse
404
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 100-102. In the passage immediately following this one, Pluvinel
discusses how to correct the horse whose resistance is to the turning motion of the volte en courbette
rather than to the courbette itself. In this instance, he actually offers two remedies for this problem,
but he again makes no allowance for differing temperaments, different variations on resistance to
turning (of which there are many), or differing responses to the two remedies suggested; see Pluvinel,
Instruction du Roy, 103-105.
405
“[V]ous le ferez attacher entre les deux pilliers, avec le cavesson de corde, où estant vous ferez
vostre devoir pour luy faire lever le devant par plusieurs fois; & s’il vous obeït avec facilité & sans
inquietude, vous ferez monter quelqu’un dessus…. Apres cela vous le ferez … tirer en arriere, &
chasser en avant, tout autant que les cordes du cavesson vous le pourront permettre…. [V]ous ferez
vostre possible lors qu’il sera entre les pilliers de luy faire un peu accompagner des hanches; que s’il
se prepare, & qu’il donne trois ou quatre courbettes, faites luy grande carresse …, & luy faites
connoistre qu’il vous a contenté …, faisant ainsi chaque iour de vostre travail, iusques à ce qu’il vous
donne autant de courbettes que vous en desirerés.” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 167-169.
406
Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 180-187.
270
will fall naturally into this “cadence” when the circumstances are right. He does not
address what must have been the far more common instance of a horse that failed to
produce the courbette spontaneously, without benefit of any formal training. Menou
is not alone in his assumption, however. In his definition of the courbette, Guillet
offers a usage example of “horse … that on its own picks up the courbette.”
407
As
noted above, Pluvinel also allows for the possibility that a horse will simply
volunteer this air. Even though he immediately follows that statement with a
discussion of horses that do not, the fact that both he and Guillet note the possibility
indicates that Menou’s assumption was based on empirical experience. La Noue, in
his discussion of how to teach the horse to courbette, offers a possible explanation
for this occurrence:
In terms of the action of the hands and the legs, as well as that of the whip,
there is nothing new here that the horse has not previously experienced,
considering that, in order to render it easy and correct at the halt, it was
necessary to make it take a good contact with the rider’s hand as well as with
the bit, and that, in order to get it to lift its forehand on small hills, it was
necessary to bring it back and support it strongly on its haunches, and that, in
order to send it forward, make it back up and halt, it had to learn to accept the
hand aids, to give to the bit, and to obey the leg aids; so much so that there is
nothing more for it to understand but a gentle regulating, by which means it
will be able, without confusion and torment, to convert its pesades into
courbettes….
408
407
“Cheval … qui de luy-mesme se presente à courbettes.” Guillet, Arts de l’homme d’épée, 40.
408
“[E]n l’action de la main, & de la iambe, aussi bien qu’en celle de la gaule, il ne s’y voit rien de
nouveau que le cheval n’ait auparavant éprouvé, consideré que pour le rendre facile & iuste au parer,
il luy a fallu faire prendre un bon appuy, tant de la main, que de la bride, & que pour le relever du
devant aux calates, il a esté necessaire de le ramener & soustenir ferme sur les hanches; & que pour
l’avancer, le faire reculer & parer, il a appris à prendre l’aide de la main, à ceder à la bride, & à obeyr
à la iambe; si bien qu’il ne luy reste rien à comprendre qu’un doux reiglement, par le moyen duquel il
puisse sans confusion & torment, convertir ces pesades en courbettes.…” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie
françoise et italienne, 116.
271
Even if a large percentage of horses did indeed just fall into the courbette the very
first time the air was proposed to them, it still is curious that Menou gives so little
attention to the training process. As indicated earlier, however, this is a bit of
recurring theme in his treatise; it is just unfortunate that there is no way of knowing
why he chose this route when most of his fellow trainers chose to discourse at great
length on this topic and even Delcampe, the most reticent of the bunch, devoted over
ten pages to it.
The two trainers who discuss training methods for the courbette in the most
depth—La Broue and La Noue—both emphasize that horses with the fiery
disposition needed to excel at the more demanding higher airs frequently are
unwilling to acquiesce to the discipline and restriction of collection in general and of
the courbette in particular. La Broue states that “horses that are by nature the most
hot-tempered, quick to react, impatient, and apprehensive are also extremely hostile
to the greatest subjection….”
409
We already have heard both these men speak on the
need for the horse to be subjugated, submissive, restricted, and restrained in order to
perform the courbette properly, so it is not too surprising to hear that horses with a
hot temperament tended to object to this air. Both La Broue and La Noue opine that
such spirited and sensitive types may in fact be better suited to military service than
to the manège, because these horses are particularly prone to the unacceptable
hopping up and down with the forefeet when asked for the accuracy and precision
required for the courbette. Here La Noue is speaking:
409
“[L]es chevaux, qui sont naturellement les plus coleres, impatients, & apprehensifs sont aussi
extremement ennemis des plus grandes subiections….” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:98.
272
Since the anxiety and impatience of the hot-tempered, unruly, spirited,
sensitive horse ordinarily make it lose its memory and obedience, and since
these are nevertheless the principle qualities that must accompany the
strength and willingness of the horse that one wants to train for the games
field and for the well-ordered high airs, its true fate will be military service,
because the subjection of courbettes … customarily increases the hot temper
and quick reactions of the impatient horse, which means that, instead of
picking up the air and its cadence, it hops its forefeet perpetually up and
down out of the rage and spite that it has to see itself held against its will to
such a carefully kept precision, which must be that of the lively high airs….
These hops … originating in nothing but a spirit hostile to the perfection of
an air that comes back to the ground so quickly, … it is impossible that, in
the confusion of [the horse’s] mind, it will have the patience and willingness
to obey the required tempo and measure for the clear and precise beat of
courbettes….
410
Several authors point out that horses with the type of temperament best suited
to the most demanding of the airs relevés not only are reluctant to accept the
restriction of collection in general and of the courbette in particular but may even
rebel when asked to submit to that degree of constraint. La Broue notes that “horses
that gaily and almost by themselves pick up the high airs that are most appropriate to
410
“Et d’autant que les inquietudes & impatiences font ordinairement perdre la memoire &
l’obeïssance au cheval colere adust, fougueux, & sensible, & que toutesfois ce sont les principales
parties qui doivent accompagner la volonté & les forces du cheval qu’on veut dresser à la carriere, &
aux airs relevez & reigles [sic], son vray faict sera la campagne, à cause que la subjection des
courbettes … accroit coustumierement la colere du cheval impatient, qui fait, qu’au lieu d’en prendre
l’air & la cadance qu’il trepigne perpetuellement, de rage & de dépit qu’il a de se voir retenu contre
son gré sur une iustesse si soigneusement gardée, que doit estre celle des airs gaillards & relevez….
[C]es trepignemens … ne procedant que d’un courage ennemy de la perfection d’un air prestement
rabattu, … il est impossible qu’en la confusion de ses esprits il ait la patience & la volonté d’obeïr au
temps & à la mesure requise à la nette & iuste battuë de telles courbettes….” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie
françoise et italienne, 113-114. La Broue says something very similar: “Le cheval qui est
extremement fougoux, sensible & determiné, est plus propre pour la campaigne, que pour les
courbettes …: à cause que les inquietudes extremes le privent communément de memoire &
d’obeyssauce [sic]: de sorte que le plus souvent au lieu de battre une mesure iuste & nette, il ne fera
que trepigner, plus par despit & de colere, que pour consentir à l’action, & mouvement du chevalier:
qui est un vice tres-desplaisant & difficile à corriger, mesmement quand l’habitude en est faite: par ce
que les chastimens & leçons ordinaires des courbettes, augmentent la colere qui tient le cheval en
impatience: & neantmoins sans estre chastié, il ne peut bonnement perdre l’inquietude, qu’il ne soit
tousiours subiect d’y retomber aussi tost que le chevalier le recherchera de quelque iustesse
extraordinaire.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:150.
273
their disposition are also those that lose their enthusiasm with the least cause when
they are too closely sought after and constrained….”
411
Of course, losing its
enthusiasm is not quite the same thing as open rebellion, which Menou indicates is
often a more accurate way to describe the reaction of such animals:
One never finds horses of great strength and full of fire that do not resist and,
when they feel pressured, do not give themselves easily over to despair; so
that, instead of responding to and enduring the aids, they perform tricks so
hazardous for their riders and themselves that one must pay close attention in
order to avoid them, and especially [with] horses that are judged able to
perform the capriole….
412
In this passage, Menou indicates that trying to teach the courbette to a horse
whose spirited and fiery nature clashes with this movement’s restraint and discipline
will require vertu. He says quite explicitly that the rider will need both foresight and
the ability to respond quickly and coolly under pressure if he wishes to emerge from
the experience in one piece. Menou’s reference to the risks associated with this
scenario also implies the need for courage, daring, and—in the event that the rider’s
foresight failed to prevent the threatened tours hazardeux—the purely physical
strength and balance to stay aboard while containing the horse’s desespoir.
Several authors note that horses with a natural aptitude for the highest airs
often will reveal their inclination under precisely the circumstances outlined by
Menou—in other words, they will leap into the air rather than submit to the
excessive collection required for the courbette. After discussing how to teach the
411
“Les chevaux qui se mettent gayement, & presque d’eux mesmes aux airs relevez qui sont plus
propres à leur disposition, sont aussi ceux, qui se rebuttent avec moins d’occasion, estans trop
recherchez & contraints….” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:147.
412
Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 137; for the full quote, see n. 432, below, in the chapter on the
capriole. Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 132, says the same thing almost verbatim.
274
horse that movement, with all its inherent restrictions, Pluvinel says that the light and
vigorous horse with a natural predilection for the higher airs may well resist these
lessons by performing some sort of jump instead of obediently yielding to the
constraint of the courbette.
413
La Broue comments that, while some horses just seem
to have a natural tendency to jump around, there are others that do so specifically
because they cannot tolerate the restrictive demands of some of the lower airs, such
as the courbette or the terre à terre:
One finds … some horses that, being of a livelier temperament, will naturally
and by themselves engage in certain erratic and uncomfortable outbursts,
persevering in this caprice as long as they feel vigorous in their back and
loins…. If the horse continues for a long time in the imperfection of these
outbursts, despite the usual corrections, it could be so born for the highest airs
that it will be almost impossible for it to hold itself always in the frank and
easy obedience of the manège….
414
The concept that horses with a native predilection for the drama and
exuberance of the airs relevés generally will never excel at the highly collected
manèges bas comes through clearly in these treatises. La Noue says that “there are
[horses] of a type so light that it seems they are meant solely for the high airs and not
for the airs that require a well managed and united power,” and La Broue says much
the same thing.
415
La Noue warns that, although technically it is possible for a
413
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 51; see also Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 112.
414
“Il se trouve … aucuns chevaux lequels estans … en leur humeur plus gaillarde, se mettent
naturellement & d’eux mesmes, sur certains eslans inegaux & incommodes perseverant en ce caprisse,
tant qu’ils se sentent en leur esquine plus nerveuse…. [S]i le cheval continue long temps en
l’imperfection de ces eslans, nonobstant les chastimens ordinaires, il pourra estre tellment nay pour
les airs plus relevez, qu’il luy sera presque impossible de se tenir tousiours à la franche & aysee
obeyssance du manege….” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 2:28-29.
415
“[I]l s’en trouve de si legers de nature, qu’il semble qu’ils soyent seulement nez pour les sauts, &
non pour les airs qui requierent une force unie & bien ménagée….” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie
françoise et italienne, 128. “Il y a des chevaux, qui naturellment ont la disposition de l’esquine
275
trainer with sufficient time, patience, and skill to teach the high airs to a horse that
has no natural gift for them and the low airs to a horse whose only desire is to jump,
neither horse will ever perform with any degree of grace.
416
La Broue is slightly less
pessimistic but nonetheless agrees with the larger sentiment: “I do not doubt that
there are some [horses] that have such good and natural qualities that one can, with
skill, make them succeed equally well at both the high and low airs: but they are
extremely rare.”
417
All of these passages indicate beyond any doubt that there was a fundamental
conflict between the equine temperament best suited for highly collected work and
the one best suited for the airs above the ground. Although La Noue and La Broue
have just noted that trainers may never successfully persuade a natural sauteur to
perform the courbette with any reliability, it nevertheless should not be forgotten that
there were many gradations along the scale of equine temperament. No matter what
the nature of the horse being introduced to the courbette, this movement required
beaucoup plus legere que nerveuse: & ceux-là reüssissent quelquefois aux sauts, qui neantmoins ont
fort peu de vigueur aux airs, où il faut plus estroittement unir, & mesnager la disposition & la force.”
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:158. In a personal conversation that the author of this study had
many years ago with Franz Rochowansky, former chief rider at the Spanish Riding School,
Rochowansky agreed that the horses best suited to the high airs are essentially useless for the regular,
highly collected school movements with no aerial activity, as they simply will not and cannot tolerate
the required restraint and submission, and he commented that the inverse is often true as well: horses
that excel at collection generally lack the fire and athleticism need to excel at the airs relevés.
416
“[E]ncore que le bon Cavalerice puisse avec le temps, la patience, & la prattique de sa science,
faire reüssir un cheval aux caprioles, qui neantmoins n’y aura point de naturel, & determiner terre à
terre celuy qui ne demandera qu’à sauter; si est-ce qu’on remarquera tousiours en l’action de l’un &
de l’autre quelque mouvement de si mauvaise grace, qu’il sera bien aysé de découvrir qu’il y aura
plus de contrainte & d’artifice en leurs maneges, que d’inclination & bonne volonté….” P. de la
Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 111.
417
“Ie ne doute pas qu’il ne s’en trouve [des chevaux], qui ont tant de bonnes & naturelles parties
ensemble, qu’on peut avec l’art les faire egalement bien reüssir aux sauts, & au [sic] maneges bas:
mais il sont fort rares.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:139.
276
both submission and exuberance. We already have seen that, if the horse were too
exuberant, it would not be able to tolerate the requisite degree of collection, but if it
were too docile and submissive, it would never exhibit the brilliance that made a
truly excellent courbetteur so prized. All that being so, there must have been many,
many occasions when the early modern French nobleman attempting to train a horse
to courbette was faced with an equine pupil whose potential for (eventual) brilliance
made the initial stages of the training process more than a little challenging.
Any rider who voluntarily would put himself in such a potentially explosive
situation had to be courageous and daring; if he hoped to retain his seat, he certainly
needed quick reflexes and a sturdy set of leg muscles. As demonstrated both by the
number of corrections and by the level of detail that La Broue and La Noue offer the
reader of their texts, the early modern French nobleman hoping to manage nothing
more complicated than a few decent courbettes had to be a veritable fount of
knowledge, skill, and experience. What is most intriguing, however, is all the other
qualities that these authors consider vital for the rider attempting to train his horse to
courbette. The rider constantly is called upon to use his judgment: to decide why
his horse is behaving as it is, to choose the best method from his extensive repertoire
to correct that behavior, to tailor that method to the particular horse and the particular
situation, and then to do it all over again (and again and again) as the training session
progresses, constantly adjusting to the demands of the moment. When the rider’s
foresight tells him that his horse is about to misbehave, he must use both his
judgment and his ability to think clearly and react decisively while under
277
considerable pressure in order to quickly select the appropriate corrective in time to
thwart the horse’s intentions. When misbehaviors occur with no warning, the rider
must judiciously weigh the costs and benefits of being overly patient and gentle or
excessively resolute and severe as he corrects the horse. The language used in these
texts to describe the various equine evasions and the skills needed to counter them
thus indicates that training a horse to courbette called heavily on a nobleman’s vertu.
278
CHAPTER 9
Vertu and the Capriole
The truly high airs—those in which the entire horse was literally “above the
ground”—were extremely difficult, and all the authors agree that only certain horses
can perform them. La Noue and Delcampe both state categorically that not all horses
are capable of the highest airs relevés, and La Noue adds that they require not only a
natural inclination on the part of the horse but also sufficient strength.
418
As will be
seen, the truly high airs took a tremendous amount of physical effort. Pluvinel,
Menou, and Delcampe also note that the ability to perform these airs is a gift of
nature, thus underscoring the fact that not all horses are so gifted.
419
By far the most dramatic and demanding of the high airs was the capriole.
This was sufficiently acknowledged and remarked upon by contemporaries that even
Guillet mentions in his definition of the term capriole that it is the most difficult of
the airs relevés.
420
All the authors emphasize that very few horses are capable of or
suited to this formidable and arduous maneuver. Pluvinel tells Louis XIII that “one
finds in truth so few horses that are naturally able to execute caprioles well that I
have only ever seen four in your kingdom that, with strength and lightness both
418
“Tous les chevaux ne sont pas capable de ces Maneges ou airs relevez….” Delcampe, Art de
monter à cheval, 229. “Tous chevaux ne sont pas propres aux airs relevez, & partant y va-il beaucoup
de jugement & d’experience pour reconnoistre ceux qui outre leur inclination auront assez de force
pour y bien reüssir….” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 111.
419
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 51; Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 112-113; Delcampe, Art de monter
à cheval, 231.
420
“La capriole est le plus difficile de tous les Airs relevez, ou Manéges par haut.” Guillet, Arts de
l’homme d’épée, 30. Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 264, agrees and goes him one better: “[C]et
air … [est] certainement le plus beau, & le plus difficile.”
279
together, have performed this air.”
421
Even if this statement is a tad exaggerated,
there is no doubt that the capriole was and remains an exceptionally difficult and
demanding movement for the horse.
From a purely physical perspective, the capriole requires a very powerful
horse, one with enough strength to launch itself and its rider fully off the ground. All
the authors also emphasize the importance of lightness—both in the sense of light on
its feet, or a horse that leaves the ground readily and willingly, and in the sense of
light on the forehand, or a horse whose hind legs come naturally under its body and
therefore carry more of its weight.
422
A horse’s power resides in its haunches, so a
horse whose hind legs are not sufficiently engaged would have difficulty achieving
sufficient elevation for this movement. These authors also stress that horses that are
naturally gifted for the capriole will be vigorous and energetic, proud and spirited,
light and agile, sensitive and responsive, bold and brave.
423
421
“Il se treuve à la verité si peu de chevaux qui puissent naturellement bien manier à capreoles, que
ie n’en ay jamais veu en vostre Royaume que quatre qui avec force & legereté tout ensemble, ayent
manié de cet air….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 119; see also Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 122;
Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 115; Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 235. Pluvinel and Menou both
say that few horses are able to adapt to the cadence of this air, and all three of them say that only some
horses are suited to or fit for its performance. La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:165-166, offers more
oblique evidence: he discusses types of horses that have a flaw which will make the capriole
exceptionally difficult for them or that will be able to perform it under certain circumstances but not
under others, from which it can be deduced that only some horses are capable of doing it with any
reliability.
422
Guillet offers the following definitions related to this crucially important quality: “Allegerir un
Cheval … c’est le rendre plus libre & plus leger du devant que du derriere”—in other words, to put
the horse on its haunches or get it engaged behind (Arts de l’homme d’épée, 6, s.v. “allegerir”). Under
leger, Guillet says: “Cheval leger est un cheval viste & dispos” and “cheval qui est leger à la main” is
one “qui a la bouche bonne, qui ne pèse pas sur le mords” (Arts de l’homme d’épée, 85). According
to DAF, “dispos” means “leger, agile.”
423
Adjectives describing the disposition or temperament of the ideal caprioleur that appear repeatedly
in the manuals include vigoureux, gaillard, sensible, leger, dispos, nerveux, fier; nouns include
orgueil, vigueur, gaillardise, gayeté, alegresse, force, courage, legeresse or legereté. Relevant
passages include but are not limited to the following: La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:165, 1:170,
280
It is difficult to ignore the parallels in the qualities possessed by the ideal
equine caprioleur and those possessed by the nobleman of perfect vertu.
Unfortunately, the only time the authors use these terms to describe a horse is when
they are discussing horses suited specifically for the most dramatic of the high airs.
Since these animals were far more the exception than the rule, the parallels do not
appear to lead anywhere very fruitful. The descriptive terms that appear most often
in the manuals have to do with the horse obeying, submitting, or bending to the will
of the rider, with disobedience, naughtiness, malice, or other méchancetés, or with
various sorts of emotional hysterics such as rage and despair—categorically not the
attributes normally associated with martial vertu. As tempting as it may be to try to
read something more into certain character traits that transcend the human-equine
barrier, the concept truly does not seem to go anywhere.
When speaking of horses suited to the capriole or one of its derivatives (the
croupade, the balotade, and un pas et un saut), the manuals frequently make
reference to the need for the rider not to dominate or suppress but to harness and
direct his horse’s more exuberant qualities. This is another example of the general
trend away from beating the horse into submission and toward soliciting its willing
participation in the training process. This advice therefore is by no means limited to
horses with an inherent predilection for the highest airs, but the authors stress that it
is particularly important not to do anything that might stifle the natural inclinations
2:152-154; P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 128-140; Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy,
119, 122, 125; Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 115, 118; Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 230-235
passim, 242-243, 250-251.
281
of these animals. La Broue, for example, begins with a general statement along these
lines and then focuses more specifically on the airs relevés:
I want the natural capacity and inclination of the horse always to be the
principal object and subject of the rider, from which he does not depart at the
wrong moment in any of his lessons, no matter what the horse does. This is
equally so at the high airs, for which much skill and patience are required in
order to maintain [the horse’s] inclination and good spirits.
424
Pluvinel and Delcampe both are very explicit in their advice to the rider
whose horse spontaneously volunteers some form of leap or jump in the midst of a
training session aimed at producing some other movement. In no case, they both
say, should the rider punish the horse for what under most circumstances would be
called its disobedience, even if it is clear that it offered the jump as a means of
evading the rider’s actual wishes. Instead, he should do everything he can to support
and encourage the horse to continue in this course of action, striving only to channel
its motion and energy into a recognizable, sustainable form that—one hopes—it will
be able to reproduce at a later time on command rather than on a whim. As always,
choosing when to be patiently lenient and when to be resolutely demanding is a
judgment call on the part of the rider: there is a fine line between encouraging his
mount’s natural inclination to do something that is (or will be in the future) a
desirable behavior and allowing it to think it can get away with evading or
disobeying its master. Pluvinel addresses how to handle this particular situation if it
should occur when the horse is learning the courbette:
424
“[I]e veux que tousiours la capacité & l’inclination naturelle du cheval, soit l’obiect & le subiect
principal du Cavalerice, dont en toutes ses leçons il ne se departe mal à propos, pour chose que le
cheval face, mesmement aux air gaillards, ausquels est requis beaucoup de patience, & d’industrie
pour le maintenir en disposition & en courage.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:140.
282
If it is moving forward and resists only … by performing jumps instead of
courbettes …, it is necessary not only to tolerate this but to keep the horse
going in the cadence that it picks up on its own, be it caprioles, balotades, or
croupades, since it is a very certain thing that the high airs are given to the
horse by nature and that it is necessary, if possible, to make it demonstrate
the one that is easiest for it and for which it has the most inclination, for
undoubtedly that is the one it will perform with the most grace.
Consequently, the prudent and judicious rider must be careful … not to hit
his horse when it picks up some cadence, whether out of goodwill or
resistance, even if it is not the one that he wants, since if it resists by jumping,
it is necessary to let it jump and to keep it going. Provided that it picks up
some cadence and that it obeys, that is enough, being very certain that, if the
horse does not have enough strength to continue in capriole, balotade, or
croupade, it will very easily drop back down on its own into courbettes or
terre à terre….
425
Delcampe expresses similar sentiments; if anything, he seems more
concerned than Pluvinel with distinguishing between jumps that are offered as a
result of high spirits (gayeté) and those that are a means of evasion or resistance.
When speaking of the initial stages of teaching the horse the capriole, for example,
Delcampe says:
At every halt, one will ask [the horse] to raise its forehand as high as
possible. If it lets loose some kind of jump, one must be careful not to punish
it, chiefly if one knows that it is doing this out of gaiety, for that is the goal at
which one wants to arrive….
426
425
“[S]’il va en avant, & que seulement il se deffende … en faisant des sauts au lieu de courbettes …,
il ne la faut pas seulement souffrir, mais faut entretenir le cheval à la cadence qu’il prendra luy-
mesme, soit capreolles, balotades, ou groupades [sic], d’autant que c’est une chose tres-certaine, que
les airs sont donnez au cheval de nature, & qu’il faut, s’il est possible, l’obliger à faire demonstration
de celuy qui luy est le plus facile, & auquel il a plus d’inclination: car sans doute c’est celuy auquel il
aura meilleure grace en maniant, partant le prudent & iudicieux Chevalier doit prendre garde …, de ne
battre pas son cheval quand il prend quelque cadance, soit de bonne volonté, ou pour deffence encor
que ce ne fust pas celle qu’il desire, d’autant que s’il se deffend des sautz, il le faut faire sauter, & luy
entretenir: car pourveu qu’il prenne une cadence, & qu’il obeïsse, il suffit, estant tres-certain que si le
cheval n’a assez de force pour continuer à capreolles, ballotades ou groupades, il se rabaissera tres-
aisément de luy-mesmes à courbettes ou terre à terre….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 51-52.
Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 112-113, says much the same thing.
426
“[A] tous les arrests on luy levera le devant le plus haut que l’on pourra, que s’il luy echappe
quelques sauts, il se faudra bien garder de le chastier, principalement si l’on connoist qu’il les fasse de
283
Delcampe also places somewhat more emphasis than Pluvinel on the importance of
the rider’s judgment. He opens the following passage by stating that “the rider must
have the judgment to follow the horse’s inclination,” but he also says that the rider’s
judgment is involved in deciding if that inclination is appropriate to the gifts and
limitations of that particular horse. (A horse’s natural inclination is one thing; its
native ability may be something else entirely.) Finally, Pluvinel says only that the
rider should allow the horse to jump and should do his best to sustain it, whereas
Delcampe wants the rider to take a far more active role, first in shaping the horse’s
spontaneous offering and then in insuring its continuation. He says:
For example, if [the rider] wanted it to do a courbette, and the horse wanted
to do a higher air, he should not punish it, provided that it did this with gaiety
and going forward, and thus if it picked up balotades, croupades, or even
caprioles, it should be allowed to enjoy itself….
The good rider will keep his horse going in the air it wants to pick up,
and, following its inclination, he will confirm it in the accuracy of its
cadence, be it croupades, balotades, or caprioles, since it is absolutely true
that the airs are [done] by inclination and given to the horse by nature. The
good horseman must do his best to make [the horse] demonstrate, as much as
its instinct will allow, the one [air] that he judges most appropriate to it and to
which it is most inclined, for this undoubtedly will be the one which it will
perform with the most grace and pleasure.
I warn the rider to refrain from hitting the horse, whatever air or
cadence it wants to pick up, whether out of willingness or out of malice, and
even when this is not the one he wants. Whatever jump it does, the rider
must keep it going, and if it has the strength, must oblige and even force it to
jump; for if it has enough strength …, it will continue….
427
gayeté, puis que c’est le but où l’on a dessein d’arriver….” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 240-
241.
427
“[I]l faut que le Cavalier ait ce jugement de suivre l’inclination du cheval. [New paragraph] Par
exemple, s’il le vouloit lever à courbette, & que le cheval voulut s’élever plus haut, il ne le faudroit
pas châtier, pourveu qu’il le fist de gayeté & en avant, & ainsi s’il s’eslevoit à balottades, croupades,
& mesmes iusqu’à cabriolles [sic], il le faudroit laisser égayer…. [New paragraph] [L]e bon Cavalier
entretiendra son cheval en l’air qu’il voudra prendre, & suivant son inclination, il l’asseurera en la
justesse de sa cadence, soit croupades, balottades, ou caprioles, d’autant qu’il est absolument vray,
284
Pluvinel’s views fall more in line with Delcampe’s when he begins to discuss
actually teaching the horse to capriole. Louis XIII asks Pluvinel, “If … the horse
resisted by bucking or leaping about [se deffendoit de son esquine; literally, resisted
with its back or loins] and … embarked on some extravagant behavior, how would
you remedy that?” Pluvinel responds:
The prudent rider will use his experience to judge the nature of its resistance.
If the resistance is forward, and if [the horse’s] intention is only to
inconvenience the rider with a large number of jumps, by no means should it
be punished…. On the contrary, the rider must allow it to jump and employ
its strength, trying amongst the jumps forward to establish a contact with its
mouth, to gain its obedience to his hands, and to regulate the cadence to what
he wishes, because … perhaps in this resistance [the horse] will encounter
such a facility in executing what he asks of it that it will perform without a
single refusal for the rider’s pleasure. This would not happen if he insisted
on preventing the horse from employing its power and lightness, whether out
of goodwill or resistance.
428
In this passage, Pluvinel wants the rider to be far more proactive than he did when he
was discussing a situation in which the horse offered some semblance of a high air
que les airs sont d’inclination, & donnez au cheval par la nature. Et il faut que le bon homme de
cheval fasse son possible à luy donner à entretendre [sic], autant que son instinct luy pourra permettre,
la demonstration de celuy qu’il jugera luy estre plus propre, & auquel il inclinera le plus: car ce sera
sans doute celuy auquel il aura meilleure grace, & qu’il fera avec plus de plaisir. [New paragraph]
[I]’advertis le Cavalier, de se garder bien de battre le cheval, quelque cadence ou air qu’il veüille
prendre, soit de bonne volonté ou par malice, & combien mesmes que ce ne fût pas celle qu’il desire;
car quelque saut qu’il fasse il faut luy entretenir, & s’il a force, l’obliger & le forcer mesme à sauter;
car s’il a assez de force …, il continuëra….” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 230-233.
428
“[S]i … le cheval se deffendoit de son esquine & … entreprenoit quelque extravagance, quel
remede y apporteriez-vous? … [L]e Chevalier prudent iugera par son experience la nature de sa
deffence. [S]i la deffence se fait en avant, & … son dessein ne soit que d’incommoder l’homme qui
sera sur luy avec un grand nombre de sauts, tant s’en faut qu’il le faille chastier … au contraire il sera
besoin le laisser sauter & employer sa force, taschant parmy ces saults en avant, de gaigner l’appuy &
l’obeïssance de la main, & regler une cadance esgale à ce qu’on desire, pource que … peut-estre en
cette deffence, [le cheval] rencontrera de la facilité en l’execution de ce qu’on luy demande, qu’il
pratiquera sans aucun reffus pour le plaisir de l’homme. Ce qui n’arriveroit pas si on se vouloit
opiniastrer à empescher le cheval d’employer sa force, & sa legereté, soit de bonne volonté, ou en se
deffendant.” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 125-126.
285
when being asked for another movement. The difference is that here the rider
actively is seeking to induce the horse to jump, rather than merely allowing it to
continue something it began on its own and then supporting its efforts until it tires
and stops of its own volition. It therefore becomes more important for the rider to
intervene sufficiently to harness his horse’s spontaneous exuberance and channel it
in the direction he desires. Yet the larger point remains equally true: by permitting
the horse to express its exuberance (or its resistance, as the case may be) and then
interfering only enough to shape and direct its natural inclination, rather than trying
to suppress it or even to control it too closely, the rider creates an environment in
which the horse is rewarded rather than punished for what it has done. Since it
experienced no negative repercussions in response to its actions, the horse therefore
will feel free to do it again, and soon it will learn to perform the air on command and
in the proper manner.
429
Given all this talk of horses with a natural talent for the capriole
spontaneously launching themselves into the air, one can imagine that these animals
could be quite a handful. The experts readily concede that, indeed, any horse that is
sufficiently strong and agile of body and bold and lively of spirit to perform this
maneuver can also have numerous drawbacks to its temperament. Horses with this
429
The concept of shaping and directing the horse’s natural inclinations presents many interesting and
potentially fruitful parallels to the histories of control, discipline, civility, self-fashioning, the body,
and so forth. For example, just as the rider of this period must mold and monitor the nature, body,
and impulses of his horse, so the “civilized” nobleman of this period must mold and monitor his own
nature, body, and impulses. This is, however, a complex topic that falls beyond the parameters of this
study. Some suggestive work has been done by a few scholars working on equestrian themes; see
Raber, “Reasonable Creatures,” and the following chapters in Raber and Tucker, Culture of the
Horse: Cuneo, “Just a Bit of Control”; Le Guin, “Man and Horse in Harmony”; van Orden, “Gens
d’armes to Gentilshommes.”
286
nature are prone to be anxious, impatient, hot-tempered, fiery, impetuous, or unruly,
all of which can make them hard to control. Many of them also are obstinate,
cunning, disobedient, rebellious, or resistant, all of which can make them difficult to
train. When a horse with any combination of these character defects is pressed to
obey, it may react in a wild, desperate, malicious, spiteful, vindictive, or even violent
fashion.
430
Pluvinel, Menou, and Delcampe all concur that the few horses with both the
native inclination for caprioles and sufficient strength and lightness to perform them
usually are also impatient and malicious and tend to resist with force and even
violence.
431
Menou and Pluvinel both note that, when pushed too hard, caprioleurs
in particular are prone to become so desperate that they resort to behaviors dangerous
both to their riders and themselves. This is, they say, because horses capable of
performing caprioles are much lighter and more vigorous than other horses, as a
result of which they have the physical strength and power to do whatever is
430
Adjectives that appear repeatedly in the manuals describing the less desirable aspects of the
temperament typical of the caprioleur include malicieux, obstiné, colere, aduste, vindicatif, cauteleux,
rebelle, impatient, fougueux, se deffendant; nouns include malignité, obstination, desobeyssance,
opiniastreté, inquietude, fougue, impatience, viollence. Relevant passages include but are not limited
to the following: La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 2:152-154; P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et
italienne, 113, 129-140 passim; Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 122, 132; Menou, Pratique du cavalier,
115, 137; Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 234, 236.
431
“[P]eu de chevaux (si de leur inclination seule ils ne s’y mettent) se pourront accommoder à cette
cadance, parce qu’il s’en treuve rarement de force suffisante & de legereté pour y fournir, qui ne
soient ordinairement impatiens, malicieux, & se deffendans de leur force.” Pluvinel, Instruction du
Roy, 122; Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 115, says virtually the same thing. “[I]l s’en trouve peu qui
ayent assez de disposition & de force, ou s’ils ont ses qualitez, ils sont d’ordinaire impatients,
malicieux, & se deffendent avec beaucoup de viollence.” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 236.
287
necessary “to throw off the yoke of obedience and subjugation in which they must be
held in order to get them to learn what one wants….”
432
La Broue comments:
The very performance of caprioles results in many occasions that can dispose
the horse, no matter how peaceful and composed it otherwise may be, to
become impatient in a very short time and to engage in many wild behaviors,
if the rider is not wise.
433
La Broue devotes an entire chapter to the nefarious behaviors of horses that
have been successfully trained to capriole. He begins by reminding the rider that
horses in general are capricious by nature and that those most suited to the airs
relevés are even more so:
Those that … have more vigor and spirit demonstrate the effects of their
superb and bizarre temperament not only when they are being asked to do
something they have not already learned, but also after they have for a long
time and on an infinity of occasions understood and practiced the true
proportions of an air or manège that they are able to perform with vigor and
precision, so that it sometimes seems that they maliciously invent more
different ways to resist than the rider can find ways to vanquish and reduce
them to the order and subjection of proper schooling, which for the moment
displeases them….
434
432
“[I]l ne se treuve iamais de Chevaux de grande force & pleins de feu qui ne se deffendent, & se
voyant pressez ne se portent facilement dans le desespoir; de sorte qu’au lieu de respondre aux aydes
& les souffrir, ils font des tours si hazardeux pour les hommes & pour eux, que c’est à quoy il faut
prendre garde de prés, afin de les éviter, & particulierement aux Chevaux que l’on iuge pouvoir
fournir à l’air de capriolles, comme estant plus legers, plus vigoureux, & par consequent se ressentent
accompagnez de force suffisante pour respondre à ce qu’ils voudront entreprendre, pour secoüer le
joug de l’obeyssance & de la subjection où il les faut mettre, pour ce qu’on desire….” Menou,
Pratique du cavalier, 137. Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 132, says the same thing almost verbatim.
433
“L’exercice des sauts apporte de soy beaucoup d’occasions, qui peuvent disposer le cheval, tant
soit-il paisible & bien composé, à se rendre en peu de temps, impatient & à faire beaucoup de
mutations licentieuses, si le Cavalerice n’est sage.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:159. In this
passage, La Broue uses the word saut rather than capriole, but he is in fact speaking specifically of
the latter. All the treatises use saut both to refer to the capriole in particular and to refer to the airs
relevés as a group; the meaning of a given instance of usage depends on the context.
434
“[L]e Cavalerice se doit souvenir que d’ordinaire les chevaux … sont naturellement capricieux: &
ceux qui outre cela ont plus de vigueur & de courage, ne monstrent pas les effects de leur superbe, &
bizarre humeur, seulement estans recherchez, de ce qu’ils n’ont iamais apprins: mais aussi apres
qu’ils ont longtemps, & une infinité de fois comprins, & pratiqué les vrayes proportions de l’air & du
manege, qu’ils peuvent vigoureusement & iustement fournir: de sorte qu’il semble aucunesfois, qu’ils
inventent malicieusement plus de defences differentes, que le Cavalerice ne trouve de moyens pour
288
La Broue goes on to describe other misdeeds in which this type of horse is inclined
to indulge, such as happily performing every saut except the one requested, or
happily performing the saut in question only when it is in the mood. He warns
against using corrections, such as galloping, which can be read by some horses as a
reward for bad behavior, thus reinforcing rather than fixing the problem. He
cautions against punishing some types too rigorously, as they may become even
more obstinate when so pushed. He complains about horses so sneaky that, once
they have exhausted themselves fighting with their rider, they pretend to cooperate
only in order to avoid more punishment; then, once they have regained their breathe,
they go right back to resisting. What makes all this even more annoying for La
Broue is that disciplining horses of this nature must be done with great discretion, as
otherwise the very spirit that makes them good caprioleurs may be broken.
435
Horses with a gift for this most difficult and demanding air relevé thus were
at best powerful and athletic of body and extremely “hot” of temperament; at worst,
they combined those qualities with character defects that could run the gamut from
sneaky and stubborn to vicious and violent. Simply mounting a horse with these
traits could be a dubious proposition in terms of rider safety. Asking such an animal
to perform a movement such as the capriole would seem to be looking for trouble.
As the authors of the manuals make clear, the very nature of the horse increases the
risk of an accident, while the nature of the movement—its height and its violence—
les vaincre & reduire à l’ordre, & à la subiection de la bonne escole, qui pour l’heure leur
desplaist….” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 2:152-153.
435
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 2:152-154.
289
increases the likelihood that any accident will be a nasty one. La Broue is
particularly emphatic regarding the violence of the movement itself: “The capriole
is one of the most violent movements”; “one of the most extreme and violent
movements that the manège horse can perform is the capriole”; “of all the airs, the
capriole [is] the most violent, the biggest, and the most extended movement.”
436
Delcampe also comments, albeit slightly more obliquely, on the violence of the
capriole, noting that “when the horse is at the highest point, it thrusts its hind legs
out with all its force,” so that it appears “as if it wanted to tear itself apart, to see it
lash out with such impetuosity.”
437
Although Delcampe does not use the word
“violent” in his description, the force and fury of the movement—in terms of both
how it looks and how it must feel to the rider—come through clearly. Pluvinel and
Menou are quite explicit on the relationship between the nature of the horse, the
nature of the movement, and the potential for harm to come to the rider as a result
thereof; here Pluvinel is speaking:
The horse cannot be taught to capriole without great danger to the trainer,
since … such impatient horses cannot be forced without resisting. During
their resistance, which there are no good means to prevent, there often is
great danger that the rider will get hurt, because in this movement more than
in any other the rider must use his wisdom, patience, and judgment in order
to foresee potential accidents about to happen, which are much greater for the
rider than in other airs since the horse gets so fiery and hot-tempered in the
capriole, which is more dangerous in that the motion is more incommodious
than any other action that one can ask it to perform….
438
436
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:166, 1:174, 2:152, respectively.
437
“ [L]ors que le cheval est dans la plus haute eslevation, il ruë & espare de toute sa force, comme
s’il sembloit se vouloir separer de luy-mesme, à le voir ruer de telle impetuosité.” Delcampe, Art de
monter à cheval, 193.
438
“[I]l n’aura pas esté reduit [à caprioles] sans grand danger de celuy qui luy aura mis, d’autant que
… tels chevaux impatiens ne se laissent pas forcer sans se deffendre; & durant leurs deffences, qui n’a
des moyens fermes pour les retenir, il y a grand danger, que souvent l’homme en ressente du mal:
290
In this passage, Pluvinel explicitly identifies four key aspects of noble vertu
that are necessary if one wants to teach a horse to capriole without getting hurt:
wisdom, patience, judgment, and foresight. Pluvinel is not alone here: all the
authors make reference to the need for the rider to deploy various aspects of vertu
when teaching a horse to capriole. The views of Pluvinel and Delcampe on the need
for the rider to use his judgment, patience, and resolve while dealing with the horse
that volunteers a saut when being asked for a lower movement already have been
presented. La Broue, Menou, Pluvinel, and Delcampe all make reference to the
danger involved in teaching and performing this movement, thereby highlighting the
need for the rider to be brave and bold. In his descriptions of the many evasions the
horse may offer when asked for the capriole, La Broue underlines the need for the
rider to possess wisdom, judgment, prudence, and discretion. All of the authors
indicate that the rider must have a wealth of skill, knowledge, and experience, and by
implication anyone who hoped to perform this maneuver successfully would need
extraordinary balance and not a little brute strength.
The treatises abound with other examples of the need for vertu when
schooling the capriole. La Broue and La Noue both note the importance of
judgment, wisdom, and discretion when introducing the horse to this extremely
pource qu’en ce Maneige icy plus qu’aux autres le Chevalier doit user de sagesse, de patience, & de
iugement, pour prevoir aux accidents [à] advenir, qui sont bien plus grands pour l’homme, qu’aux
autres airs, d’autant que le cheval prend plus de fougue, & de colere aux saults, laquelle est plus
dangereuse, en ce que les temps sont plus incommodes qu’à aucune autre action qu’on luy puisse faire
executer….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 123. Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 116, says almost
exactly the same thing.
291
difficult and demanding air. La Broue wants the rider to be able to judge the limits
of his horse’s strength and inclination, which will give him the wisdom to demand no
more than the horse can give.
439
La Noue warns the rider never to push his horse to
the end of its resources but instead to work it with discretion, using his judgment to
keep the lessons short enough that the horse’s lightness and liveliness are
maintained.
440
Pluvinel and Menou both concur that, when teaching the horse to
capriole, lessons must be kept short because the horse gets exhausted so quickly.
That being the case, the rider must be particularly attentive to his horse in order to
assess its status, and he must be both more cautious and more creative in his
approach. Pluvinel says:
One cannot force a horse to jump when it is out of breath and at the end of its
strength, where the capriole puts it much more quickly than the other airs; if
one persists, the problem is made worse by the fatigue that it feels in its back,
legs, and feet. As a result, being necessary for these reasons to make its
lessons very short, the prudent horseman must work at the capriole with
much more judgment, patience, and inventiveness than at the other airs, in
which he can force his horse [to perform]….
441
Elsewhere in his treatise, Menou reiterates the importance of judgment, patience, and
creativity when teaching the horse to capriole. He also stresses the need for the rider
439
“[S]ur tout ie desire, que le Cavalerice cognoisse à quoy, & iusques où peut fournir la disposition
& la force du cheval, & qu’il se contente de la satisfaction, qu’il en pourra sagement tirer en ces
leçons, sans venir souvent aux extremitez.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:166.
440
“[O]n ne doit iamais mettre fin à la leçon par la fin des forces de cheval, qui doit estre maintenu en
sa legeresse & gaillardise par la brieveté de l’exercice discrettement continué.” P. de la Noue,
Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 129.
441
“[O]n ne peut forcer un cheval de sauter quand il est au bout de son haleine, & de sa force, où l’air
des saults le met bien plustost que les autres, l’ennuye davantage dans la continuation par la fatigue
qu’en ressentent ses reins, ses jambes & ses pieds; & par consequent estant necessaire pour ces causes
de faire ses leçons fort courtes, il faut que le prudent Chevalier travaille à l’air des capreoles avec
beaucoup plus de iugement, de patience, & d’invention, qu’aux autres où il peut forcer son cheval….”
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 132-133. Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 138-139, says much the same
thing.
292
to be resourceful as well as prompt in the application of his ingenuity: “With this air
the horseman must hunt for all sorts of ways to make his horse understand promptly
what is being asked of it….”
442
Delcampe echoes the other authors regarding the
importance of good judgment, prudence, and wisdom when performing this
movement.
443
Given the nature typical of the horse best suited to the capriole, there is, of
course, no guarantee that the learning process will proceed smoothly. As Menou and
Pluvinel already have pointed out, when attempting the capriole it is more important
than ever for the rider to employ his wisdom, patience, and judgment in order to
foresee his horse’s disobedience before it happens, so that he may apply the
appropriate remedy and thus prevent an accident. They both emphasize that this is
true specifically because the capriole is so dangerous. Menou says:
The rider must be considerably more careful to foresee [the horse’s] malice
before it happens, in order to provide the correction he thinks best, which he
will do provided that he is skilled and experienced in the discipline. That
being the case, he will judge by the behavior and in the eyes of his horse the
good or the bad that it will do before it does it.
444
442
“Il faut bien avoir soin d’apporter en l’execution de ses leçons une grande patience &
consideration, prendre garde d’ennuyer le Cheval; pource que comme j’ay dit cy-devant, on ne le peut
pas forcer de sauter …; c’est pourquoy il faut travailler aux leçons de capriolles avec beaucoup plus
de iugement, de patience & d’inventions qu’aux autres airs, où l’on peut forcer son Cheval; La cause
en est, qu’à cét air-là il faut que le Cavalier cherche toutes sortes de moyens pour faire concevoir
promptement à son Cheval ce qu’il luy demande….” Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 143.
443
“[V]ous vous souviendrez de travailler à l’air des caprioles, avec beaucoup plus de iugement,
prudence & sagesse qu’à tout autre air que ce soit….” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 251-252.
444
“[I]l faut que le Cavalier soit bien plus consideratif à prevoir sa malice avant qu’elle arrive, pour y
donner le remede qu’il verra bon estre; ce qu’il fera pourveu qu’il soit expert & usité en la science; car
cela estant, il iugera par l’action & dans les yeux de son Cheval le bien ou le mal qu’il doit faire, avant
qu’il l’ait executé.” Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 116. Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 123-124, says
almost exactly the same thing.
293
This sort of foresight requires the rider to have the knowledge, skill, experience, and
judgment to be able both to recognize a potential disobedience and to choose, with
speed and accuracy, the correction best suited to preempt it. In this situation more
than any other, the rider therefore must be thoroughly familiar with the different
types of horses, with the various ways in which they may resist and why, and with all
the possible responses to resistance and how and when to apply them. Just as
importantly, he must be able to do all of this with lightning speed and without ever
losing his cool: the nature of the capriole demanded an extremely rapid response if
the rider were to fend off pending disaster with any hope of success.
La Broue and La Noue both point out that sometimes a potential
disobedience is best preempted, not by an actual correction, but by a diversionary
tactic. Here, as always, the rider’s foresight will combine with his judgment,
knowledge, and experience to lead him to the most beneficial solution. These
authors offer much the same advice to the trainer attempting to teach caprioles sur
les voltes to a horse that balks, backs up, and bucks when asked to move forward (the
cheval ramingue). Given this type’s particular method of resisting, they say,
distraction may be more effective than punishment. As soon as the wise and
experienced rider senses that his mount is about to embark on its typical
misbehaviors, he therefore should preempt its disobedience by changing its location,
its lesson, or both. Here La Broue is speaking:
The rider has much to do … in order to prevent the very precise contours of
this movement from crushing [the horse’s] vigor, or reducing it to some vice
…, as can easily happen when the rider is not wise and experienced enough
294
to forestall the horse’s natural malice, wickedness, or timidity by frequently
driving it from the place where it restrains itself and throws itself backward,
and by varying its lessons in such a way that it cannot premeditate the
malicious effects of its treacherous and resistant spirit.
445
When faced with a caprioleur that absolutely refuses to cooperate, La Broue notes
that truly gifted riders will be able to determine if the horse is even receptive to
punishment. Having made that initial assessment, they then will be able to apply
their judgment to their knowledge base in order to choose the appropriate
punishment or, if the horse is not likely to respond to correction at that particular
moment, to decide what diversionary measure might prove useful instead:
On these occasions, the best masters have enough reason to demonstrate the
most remarkable results of their knowledge, not only by wishing to punish
malicious faults severely—for such horses take no notice of the usual
corrections—but also and above all by recognizing when [these horses] are
inclined toward punishment, and even by using various means appropriate to
divert them….
446
The authors’ descriptions of the explosive motion of the capriole, the
explosive nature of the horse able to do it, and the inherent risks resulting from either
one or both make it abundantly clear that anyone who was willing to attempt the
445
“[L]e Cavalerice a beaucoup à faire … pour empescher que les plus iustes proportions du manege,
ne luy accablent la vigueur, ou le reduisent plustost à quelque vice …, comme il advient facilement,
quand le Cavalerice n’est sage & bien experimenté, pour prevenir le malicieux, vile ou timide naturel
du cheval, en le chassant souvent du lieu, auquel il se retient & s’accule, & en luy diversifiant les
leçons de façon qu’il ne puisse premediter les effects malicieux de son courage double & fingard.” La
Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:166. La Noue says something similar: “[S]a vigueur … luy pourroit
estre accablée par la prattique de la iuste proportion de cét air, trop opiniatrement continuée en un
mesme lieu, où il a moyen de premediter comment il se pourra maintenir en sa double & fingarde
volonté, si le Cavalier n’y prevoit en l’en portant hors dés qu’il sent qu’il s’y retient, ou s’y accule, &
luy changeant de leçon, comme de place pour vaincre son déloyal naturel….” P. de la Noue,
Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 134.
446
“En ces occasions les maistres plus excellens ont assez de subiect pour monstrer les plus singuliers
effects de leur sçavoir, non seulement en voulant chastier severement les fautes malicieuses: car tels
chevaux n’ignorent aucun remede commun: mais sur tout en recognoissant quand ils sont disposez au
chastiment, & mesmes en usant de divers moyens propres à les divertir….” La Broue, Cavalerice
françois, 2:153.
295
capriole had to be brave, bold, and physically able to remain in the saddle while his
horse performed this maneuver. Once again, however, the authors of the manuals
are quick to emphasize the more cerebral aspects of horsemanship, which become
even more important as the risks increase. They insist, in fact, that the rider must
employ more of his knowledge, skill, experience, judgment, prudence, discretion,
wisdom, foresight, resourcefulness, inventiveness, patience, resolve, adaptability to
change, accuracy of decision, and rapidity of execution, all in the face of constant
danger, when performing the capriole than when performing any other maneuver.
All this being so, it cannot be denied that the capriole did indeed call to a high
degree on many of the qualities associated with noble vertu.
Its capacity to showcase a nobleman’s vertu was not, however, the only
appeal of the capriole. Because this air was spectacular and dramatic as well as
difficult and dangerous, it also was viewed as the best vehicle for demonstrating the
rider’s grace and sprezzatura. As Part Four will show, all the authors emphasize
how important it is for the rider to maintain his air of graceful nonchalance at all
times, and they all agree that this is particularly crucial when he is performing the
capriole.
296
PART 4: CHANGE
Part Three of this study explored how manège equitation and the airs above
the ground helped the early modern French nobility to stay in touch with its existing
beliefs by keeping vertu on horseback while moving it out of its customary contexts
(combat and tourneying) and into one that would permit more nobles to demonstrate
it. This allowed them to revalidate both the heavily martial meaning they had
assigned to vertu and the connections between that particular type of virtue and noble
status itself. Because of this, horsemanship served as a source of reassuring
continuity during a period when the traditional nobles’ belief system about what
constituted legitimate noblesse was under attack from a variety of directions.
In Part Four, this study will examine the ways in which manège equitation
and the airs relevés simultaneously served as dynamic vehicles for change, allowing
the nobles to respond to the external pressures on their self-perception and definition
in ways that eventually would result in a new set of beliefs about the meaning of
nobility. Taking virtue off the battlefield and the tournament ground and transferring
it to the manège and the games field was not merely a source of continuity; this
relocation also shifted the paradigm just enough to open the door to change. That
door then was opened yet further by the modification of the form in which the
qualities of martial vertu henceforth were to be displayed in mounted contexts. The
highly stylized and elegant horsemanship demanded by manège equitation and the
mounted games related to it in fact was sufficiently different from the pragmatic but
297
unrefined horsemanship of battle and tourney not just to passively permit change but
to actively facilitate it.
We already have seen that the manuals of horsemanship make repeated
reference to the various facets of noble vertu that are required by the accomplished
horseman. These texts place an equal emphasis, however, on the qualities of grace
and sprezzatura, clearly indicating that they are just as important to any successful
mounted endeavor, and especially to the airs relevés. As discussed in Chapter One,
at the time that the earliest manual used in this study first was published in the 1590s,
these attributes only recently had been added to the noble ideal. They had their roots
in Renaissance Italian courtly literature, especially Castiglione’s Book of the
Courtier. The influence of this text on the early modern French nobility’s belief
system about the meaning of noblesse and the growing importance of grace and
sprezzatura within that system come through particularly clearly in the manuals.
447
All of these texts, even the earliest among them, make multiple references to the
need for the rider always to maintain an appearance of effortless elegance and
elegant effortlessness. The frequency with which grace and sprezzatura are
emphasized make it clear that, by the beginning of the seventeenth century, these
concepts already were becoming increasingly important components of what
eventually would be a new set of beliefs about the definition of nobility. In addition
to the evidence in the manuals themselves, as discussed in Chapter Three, instruction
in manège equitation and mounted games formed the core of the curriculum at the
447
For the methodology behind the argument that The Book of the Courtier had a profound impact on
early modern French noble identity, see pp. 69-77 in the Introduction.
298
new académies, where nobles could obtain the refined culture that also was
becoming a central component of the new definition of nobility. The ability to
deliver a graceful and sprezzata mounted performance thus was doubly implicated in
emerging notions about noble identity.
448
Through their emphasis on the importance of grace and sprezzatura when
mounted, the manuals reveal how the nobility unconsciously manipulated the
longstanding noble attribute of horsemanship to create a space for its beliefs that was
sufficiently different from what had gone before to allow for change. As a result,
manège equitation and the airs above the ground helped to facilitate the traditional
nobility’s transition from an anachronistic warrior-knight identity that clashed with
its political, military, social, and cultural contexts to a more courtly and aristocratic
identity that was better suited and more responsive to its actual circumstances. In
this way, horsemanship contributed to the nobility’s successful adaptation and thus
not just to its survival but to its continued prosperity.
448
Unlike the retention of vertu discussed in the previous chapters, the relationship between
horsemanship, grace and sprezzatura, the académies, and early modern French noble identity has
received some attention from modern scholars. Their research will be referenced wherever possible
and appropriate.
299
CHAPTER 10
Grace, Sprezzatura, and Manège Equitation
Throughout all five manuals of horsemanship, there are constant references to
the importance of both grace and that nonchalant lack of constraint, casual
effortlessness, and natural ease in everything done and said which this study calls
sprezzatura. This is especially true when the noble horseman is performing before
an audience of his peers. La Broue points out that the sole purpose of riding in such
a context is to show off the rider’s skill and thereby to give pleasure to those who
watch. He reminds us, however, that horsemanship will be esteemed only when it is
done gaily and with ease—that is, with grace and sprezzatura.
449
Pluvinel and
Menou both emphasize that the rider cannot perform gracefully if his horse is not
doing so. The rider’s performance therefore will incite spectator pleasure and esteem
only when he and his mount are performing with the requisite levels of elegant
insouciance. This mutual state of grace is hopelessly symbiotic: the horse will not
be graceful unless it enjoys what it is doing, and the rider will not be graceful if he
has to compel the horse to perform by beating it or even simply by cueing it too
visibly. These provisos obviously are mutually exclusive: if the horse is enjoying
449
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:139, says that horsemanship is “une chose, qui ne doit estre
estimee, qu’entant qu’elle est faite gayement, & avec facilité …, [& qui] n’est que pour une
delectation particuliere, & pour faire mieux paroistre le chevalier …, passant honnestement le temps,
en exerçant à cheval ses forces & dexterité.”
300
itself, it will not need to be forced, and if it is subjected to force, it will not be having
a good time.
450
The key to equine enjoyment, as the previous chapters have shown, is for the
rider to use his wise and reasoned judgment to assess what a given horse is and is not
capable of, and then never to ask for more than it can give. This holds true whether
it is a question of natural talent or one of boredom or fatigue; either way, the rider’s
ability to recognize how much is enough is crucial to the maintenance of his polished
appearance. Pluvinel addresses how to avoid the type of gracelessness that can result
from trying to squeeze too much effort out of a horse that is beginning to tire. His
advice is quite simple: never request more than half of what you know your horse is
capable of giving, and you will never risk the embarrassment of finding yourself in
mid-performance on a horse that is out of breath and at the limits of its strength. In
this passage, the grand écuyer is speaking to Louis XIII about Pluvinel’s methods:
I laud his custom of never wishing to ask of a horse more than about half of
what it can do, finding it to be based on very sound reasoning, which is that
doing otherwise, the rider and the horse lose all their gracefulness. For if the
horse runs out of strength and wind in the midst of its work, the rider’s aids
must become stronger and more apparent, thus losing the gracefulness of
their action….
451
450
“[L]e Cheval doit prendre plaisir à manier; autrement le Cavalier & luy ne sçauroient rien faire de
bonne grace”; “[P]our qu’un Cheval manie de bonne grace, il faut l’obliger de prendre son air luy-
mesme, & non le forcer de ce faire …”; “[I]amais l’homme n’aura bonne grace tant qu’il sera
contraint de battre son Cheval, & iamais le Cheval ne sera plaisant à regarder en son manege, s’il ne
prend plaisir à toutes les actions qu’il fera….” Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 20, 43, 53, respectively.
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 5, 43, echoes Menou’s first and third quotes almost verbatim; the second
quote has no equivalent in Pluvinel.
451
“[I]e loue fort sa coustume de ne desirer rien tirer d’un cheval qu’à peu pres de la moitié de ce
qu’il peut, la treuvant appuyée d’une fort bonne raison, qui est que faisant autrement, le Chevalier &
le cheval perdent toute leur bonne grace, pource que si le cheval vient à s’afoiblir de force & d’haleine
en maniant, il faut necessairement que les aydes du Chevalier soient plus grandes & plus apparentes,
perdant par ce moyen la bonne grace en leur action….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 120.
Elsewhere, Pluvinel says something similar in respect to passades: “[I]e conseille au Chevalier qui
301
To illustrate the importance of not overstepping the innate abilities of one’s
mount and forcing it to perform an air to which it is not suited, La Broue makes an
analogy with a man who wishes to perform grands jêtés when all he really is suited
for is a simple box step:
The horseman … can look at least as good on a horse that is easy, well
trained, and well schooled in the low airs as he will on one that is performing
some air relevé whose action is nonetheless displeasing—that is, forced and
done as if out of pique. To compare this with the activities of the man
interested in new, rare, and extraordinary things [l’homme curieux], is there
any more wasted effort than that which he puts into wanting to execute high
dance leaps with agility and lightness, when his talents categorically do not
lie in that direction? Would it not be better for him to be satisfied with
performing a nice five-step or some low movement, provided that this was
done with grace and a clear and delicately proportioned tempo, than to cause
laughter amongst those who are watching him work, roughly and against his
natural talent, at a thing that must be esteemed only as long as it is done gaily
and with facility? This is just as true with horses….
452
In short, whether the dancer in question is human or equine, it is better for him (it) to
do something simple really well than to do something difficult badly or even
indifferently, especially when the sole purpose of the activity is to show off the grace
and skill of the performer. The key difference, of course, is that it is the clumsy
veut faire voir son cheval manier de bonne grace, & luy aussi, de n’entreprendre point plus que cinq
passades …, pour ce que le cheval en peut fournir gayement tout d’une haleine iusques à ce nombre,
sans se faire battre, ny porter des aides de la main & des talons, & par ce moyen le Chevalier peut
demeurer en sa bonne posture.” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 90.
452
“Le Chevalier … peut paroistre pour le moins autant sur un cheval facile, bien dressé, & bien
adiusté au manege de guerre, qu’il sçauroit faire sur celuy, qui se maniera de quelque air relevé,
duquel neantmoins l’action en soit desplaisante, assavoir forcee, & faite comme par despit. Et par
comparaison des exercices de l’homme curieux, y-a-il peine plus mal employee, que celle qu’il met à
vouloir danser dispostement & par haut, quand son inclination n’y est aucunement propre? ne
vaudroit-il pas mieux qu’il se contentast de bien faire de beaux cinq pas, & des passages bas, pourveu
que ce fust d’un temps net, delicatement proportionné, & avec grace, que de faire rire ceux, qui le
voyent travailler grossierement & contre son naturel en une chose, qui ne doit estre estimee, qu’entant
qu’elle est faite gayement, & avec facilité? Tout ainsi en est-il des chevaux….” La Broue,
Cavalerice françois, 1:139.
302
dancer who will be mocked for his own awkward performance, whereas it is the rider
of the over-faced horse who will be derided for his mount’s inability to meet the
desired standard. In this situation, in fact, the rider will be condemned not only for
the lack of skill, grace, and sprezzatura in his performance, but also for his lack of
judgment in attempting a difficult movement on a horse that is not up to the task.
In the final analysis, it is thus the rider far more than the horse who is being
assessed, a distinction that in fact is not so surprising. Whenever a seventeenth-
century French nobleman was being observed by his peers in a “performance”
situation, his bearing and behavior were being judged against that courtly ideal that
insisted that all his actions be executed not just gracefully but sprezzatamente—that
is, with a level of skill that allowed the activity in question to appear totally
effortless. Since manège equitation so often was something one did before an
audience of one’s peers, a rider’s performance was constantly subjected to these
standards. Even though the manuals make frequent reference to the horse’s grace,
they also make it abundantly clear that the gracefulness (or not) of his mount
devolves firmly on the rider, so there as well the rider is the one who must meet the
accepted standard in order for his performance to be well received. As Delcampe
points out, if he fails to do so, he runs the risk of being publicly ridiculed, which
almost certainly will be detrimental to his reputation. Delcampe actually is speaking
here of the mounted game of running at the ring, but his recommendation holds true
for any mounted activity the rider might perform in front of his peers:
303
I advise all gentlemen … to never practice this game in public unless they are
totally confident in every particular. Especially since, as I have said, this
game normally is practiced before ladies, and since they seem to have more
right and freedom to mock those who are clumsy and inept, I advise the
prudent horseman to not put himself thus at risk, for fear of considerable
damage to his reputation….
453
The influence of Castiglione’s Book of the Courtier is clearly discernible in
this comment regarding the relationship between public performance, spectator
response, and the performer’s reputation. Delcampe’s admonition that the rider not
attempt anything for which he is not fully prepared in order to avoid public mockery
and damage to his reputation is a direct echo of Castiglione’s advice to the courtier
who is considering a similar type of public performance. Here Castiglione is
speaking of those “bodily exercises” that—just like manège equitation, especially the
airs relevés and mounted games—“are almost never practiced except in public, such
as jousts, tourneys, stick-throwing, and all the rest that have to with arms.” After
exhorting the courtier to “contrive to be not less elegant and graceful than unerring
with his weapons,” he says:
When our Courtier has to take part in these [activities], he must first contrive
to be so well equipped in point of horses, weapons and dress, that he lacks
nothing. And if he does not feel himself well provided with everything, let
him on no account engage, for if he fails to do well, the excuse cannot be
made that these things are not his business.
454
453
“[I]e conseille à tous les galans hommes … de ne pratiquer iamais cet exercice en public, qu’ils ne
soient bien asseurez en particulier. D’autant, comme i’ay dit, que cet exercice qui se practique
d’ordinaire à la veuë des Dames, & qu’elles semblent avoir plus de loy & de liberté de se gausser des
mal-adroits. Ie conseille au Cavalier prudent, de ne se mettre pas en ce hazard, crainte de quelque
notable prejudice à leur reputation….” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 201-202.
454
Castiglione, Book of the Courtier, 82-83.
304
This advice applies equally well to the noble horseman contemplating a performance
of the airs relevés in the presence of his peers: since manège equitation is the
exclusive purview of the nobility, if he fails to do well, the excuse cannot be made
that these things are not his business. As Delcampe has pointed out, his reputation
surely will suffer as the result of such ill advised behavior.
It is precisely because of this relationship between performance and
reputation that falling off was such a disaster for a nobleman. Just as retaining a
graceful seat and a nonchalant demeanor while one’s horse behaved badly was
viewed with approval, so parting company with one’s horse under the same
circumstances was viewed quite harshly. Falling off, much like performing a
difficult air on a horse that was not suited to it or participating in a mounted game
whose intricacies one had not yet mastered, was seen as a spectacular failure not only
of the rider’s skill, grace, and sprezzatura but also of his good judgment: if he was
not fully prepared in every particular to perform in the fashion considered
appropriate to a gentleman, which most emphatically did not include falling off, then
he should never have made the attempt in the first place. The rider’s peers would
assume that he fell because he lacked the requisite qualities of noblesse—in this case
the knowledge, experience, judgment, prudence, wisdom, and discretion to know
better than to try a horse or an activity that was beyond him in the first place, and the
skill, strength, grace, and sprezzatura to avoid falling once he had so foolishly
committed himself. The possible ramifications for the nobleman of such a judgment
305
by his peers fall outside the parameters of this study, but they would not have been
good and might have been appalling.
As for the precise constituents of a graceful and sprezzata mounted
performance, all the authors place tremendous emphasis on the rider’s position,
going into great detail about the exact placement of his feet, calves, knees, thighs,
seat, waist, back, shoulders, arms, hands, and head.
455
The rider’s posture is
important partly because it is only when the rider is sitting correctly that the horse
will be able to properly round its back, engage its haunches, and arch its neck, all of
which are necessary to its correct (and graceful) performance. As La Broue notes,
“To properly adjust and refine the horse, particularly in the high airs, the rider must
be quick, straight, steady, taut, and as a consequence beautiful when mounted.”
456
La Broue also points out, however, that the inverse is equally true. If the rider is
flopping all over the place, he will reduce his mount to a similar state of disorder:
Whereas the correct movements of the body, made gracefully and at the
proper moment, are useful for adjusting the horse, those that in contrast are
extreme and rough, in addition to being ungraceful, disturb it and often create
disorder in its actions. So much so that I can agree neither with the rationale
nor with the excuse of those who customarily make large and superfluous
movements to such little profit…. I cannot agree with the claims of those
who, perhaps to conceal the imperfection and bad habit of their disagreeable
gestures, want us to think that every unbecoming thing they do serves to
school the horse. On the contrary, I say and assert with reason and
experience that, in order to make the horse go and move correctly, keeping
the regularity of some nice air clearly sustained in all sorts of manèges, the
455
P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 32-34, and Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 9-
11, are two of many good examples of this type of detailed description of the rider’s position.
456
“[P]our bien adiuster & affiner le cheval, principalement aux airs gaillards, le Cavalerice doit estre
diligent, droit, ferme, tendu, & par consequent beau à cheval.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:173.
306
rider must be firm and straight on his horse, without making any actions with
his arms, body, or legs that are not for some necessary effect….
457
In this passage, La Broue clearly is expressing concern regarding the effect
on the horse that bad riding will have. It is worth noting, however, that the passage
immediately preceding this one is another and even longer diatribe against bad
riders, in which La Broue criticizes them not because of the effect they have on their
mounts, but because they are so ridiculous to watch. And in fact it would appear that
it is this issue, and not the relationship between rider position and equine
performance, that is the primary motivator behind all the detail on exactly where the
rider is to put each individual body part. For example, Pluvinel says to Louis XIII:
I beg [Your Majesty] to be careful to put his back a bit to the rear when he
halts his horse, something so necessary that it always must be practiced in
this action, whether halting from the walk, the trot, the canter, the full gallop,
or any other air whatsoever. The benefit that results is that, by doing it
thusly, the rider has much more grace, and the horse finds it more easy and
comfortable to put its haunches under its stomach, due to the counterweight
the rider creates on the horse’s back with this action. The inconvenience that
results by doing the opposite is that the rider has very bad grace in stopping
short and leaning his head into the horse’s mane and his stomach into the
pommel of the saddle, at which point, if the horse made some impromptu
jump or gave some sort of buck, it would disturb the rider and make him lose
his proper position.
458
457
“[A]u lieu que les iustes mouvements du corps faits à temps & accortement sont utiles pour aiuster
le cheval, ceux au contraire, qui sont extremes & grossiers, outre qu’ils ont mauvaise grace,
l’incommodent & le mettent souvent en desordre. Tellement que ie ne puis approuver la raison ny
l’excuse que peut avoir celuy, qui est coustumer de faire ces grandes & superflues actions si peu
profitables…. [I]e ne sçaurois approuver le dire de ceux, qui peut-estre pour couvrir l’imperfection &
habitude de leurs mauvais gestes, veulent qu’on pense que tout ce qu’ils font de mal seant, sert à la
bonne escolle du cheval. Ie dis au contraire & soustiens avec la raison & l’experience, que pour faire
aller & manier le cheval iustement gardant l’egalité de quelque bon air nettement soustenu en toutes
sortes de maneges, il faut que le chevalier soit ferme & droicte à cheval, sans qu’il face nulle action de
bras, de corps, ny de iambes, que ce ne soit pour quelque effect necessaire….” La Broue, Cavalerice
françois, 1:47.
458
“[I]e la supplie de prendre garde à mettre un peu le dos en arriere quand elle arrestera son cheval,
chose si necessaire, qu’il faut tousiours la pratiquer en cette action soit en arrestant, de pas, de trot, de
galop, à toute bride, ou à quelqu’autre air que ce soit. Le bien qui en arrive est, qu’en faisant de la
307
Although Pluvinel does note that a perfectly correct rider position will make it easier
for the horse to do its job properly, the “inconvenience that results by doing the
opposite” is not that the horse will be hampered in its performance but that the rider
will look bad. Both Menou and Pluvinel state quite bluntly that appearances are in
fact so important that they outweigh actual skill. Here is Menou:
In order to achieve and acquire perfection in the discipline, it is necessary to
begin, to continue, and to finish with the correct position of the rider, because
it is far more pleasant to watch a pretty rider who does not know what he is
doing than one who is very knowledgeable but lacks grace.
459
The primary goal is thus for the rider to look good at all times, and virtually all the
authors emphasize that the key to looking good is minimal movement: the less
visible the rider’s aids are and the less he moves his body, legs, and arms, the more
skillful he appears and the more agreeable he is to watch. The perfectly graceful
rider in fact sits so still, firm, and straight, and his aids are so subtle, that his
involvement in the performance is nearly invisible. “The slightest action of the rider
must be an absolute order for the horse … without the rider making any unpleasant
movement of his body, arms, and legs.” “He must ride [the horse] without changing
position, with no wiggling or wobbling of the body, hands, or legs, nor any
sorte, l’homme en a bien meilleure grace, & le Cheval y sent de la commodité pour mettre plus
facillement les hanches sous le ventre, à cause des contrepoids que le Chevalier faict par cette action
sur les reins du Cheval. [L]’inconvenient qui en reussit faisant le contraire est, que que [sic] le
Chevalier a tres-mauvaise grace d’arrester court, & de pancher la teste pres du crin, & son estomach
pres du pommeau de la selle: auquel temps si le cheval faisoit quelque sault, & donnoit quelque tour
d’esquine, il incommoderoit son homme, & luy feroit perdre sa bonne posture.” Pluvinel, Instruction
du Roy, 75-76.
459
“[P]our bien faire & acquerir la perfection de la science, il faut commencer, continuer & finir par la
bonne posture du Cavalier; parce qu’il y a bien plus de plaisir de voir un bel homme de Cheval
ignorant en la science, qu’un tres-sçavant de mauvaise grace.” Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 25.
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 9, says the same thing almost verbatim.
308
displeasing movement or facial expression…, his aids as subtle as they are swift….”
“I would like him to be always straight and taut …, without making any unnecessary
movement …, [and] to give the aids for the canter and all the other airs with his
body, arms, and legs with such ease and skill that they are almost imperceptible….”
“When a trained horse merits a swift kick with the spurs, [the rider] must apply them
clearly and firmly, putting his legs back in their original and correct place so quickly
that even those who are watching him closely barely will be able to see their
movement.” “The less the rider moves on the horse, the more agreeable he is to
watch….”
460
The last two quotes in particular underline the reason it is so important for the
rider to perform with skill, grace, and sprezzatura: so that he will be pleasant to
watch, without which he never will be lauded and admired, which is, of course, the
point of the whole endeavor. Several authors give hilarious examples of riders who,
for one reason or another, fail rather spectacularly to meet the expected standard.
Both Menou and Pluvinel offer variations of the following passage; this is Pluvinel’s
rendition:
460
The quotes given in the text are, respectively: “[I]l faut que le moindre mouvement de l’homme,
soit un commandement absolu au cheval …, sans que l’homme fasse nulle action mauvaise du corps,
des bras, ny des jambes.” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 93; Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 105-106,
says the same thing virtually verbatim. “[I]l le doit conduire sans changer de posture, sans bransler ou
balancer le corps, ny de la main, ny les jambes, ny sans faire aucune mauvaise action ou grimace …,
les aydes aussi delicates que prestes….” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 10. “[I]e voudrois qu’il
fust tousiours droit & tendu …, sans faire un … inutile mouvement…. Ie veux … que … [le
chevalier] consente au temps du galop, & de tous les autres ayrs avec le corps, les bras, & les iambes,
par telle industrie & facilité, que presque on ne s’en puisse appercevoir …”; “[Q]uand le cheval dressé
meritera un bon coup d’esperon, il le luy doit donner nettement & si ferme …, remettant soudain les
jambes, en leur premiere & iuste place si diligemment, qu’à peine ceux, qui le regarderont de pres,
ayent peu voir le mouvement d’icelles.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:122, 1:123, respectively.
“[T]ant moins le Cavalier fait d’action à Cheval, & tant plus agreable il est à regarder….” Menou,
Pratique du cavalier, 105; Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 92, says the same thing.
309
There are a great number of people … who make their horses move off … by
a displeasing method: when they want to make them depart, they open their
legs and their sword arm…. This action is not to my taste for two reasons:
first, the less the rider moves on the horse, the more agreeable he is to watch;
second, it can happen that one will surprise a horse or that it will be weary
and tired in such a way that it will not depart as a result of this posture on the
part of the rider, and the man is then left, legs open, arm lifted, and his horse
just standing there, which will be ungraceful….
461
Aside from saying—with perhaps a hint of ironic understatement—that this
ridiculous posture is ungraceful, neither Pluvinel nor Menou says what repercussions
such behavior will have for the rider. Delcampe offers the following hint:
The skilled and pretty horseman cannot make too few movements of either
his body or his legs. This is why he must continually work to hide his aids as
well as his corrections and to make them as invisible as he can. For truly,
there is nothing more shocking to the viewers’ eyes than ugly aids, wobbling
body, and flapping legs, which makes me beg those who have this type of ill
grace to do their best to correct it.
462
Here is a slightly new variation on the need to look good: the rider who fails to do so
not only will not please his audience or gain their esteem, he will shock their eyes
and—presumably—gain their derision.
461
“[I]l y a grand nombre de personnes, … qui font partir leurs chevaux … [par] une mauvaise
methode qui est. Lors qu’ils les veulent faire partir, ils ouvrent les jambes & le bras de l’espée …:
mais cette action n’est pas à ma fantasie pour deux raisons: L’une que tant moins le Chevalier fait
d’action à cheval, & plus agreable il est à regarder: & l’autre qu’il peut arriver qu’on surpren-prendra
[sic] un cheval, ou qu’il sera las & fatigué de telle sorte, que s’il ne part apres cette posture du
Chevalier, & que l’homme demeure les jambes ouvertes, le bras levé, & son cheval en une place, cela
sera de mauvaise grace….” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 92. Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 105, says
much the same thing.
462
“[L]e bel & bon homme de cheval ne sçauroit faire trop peu d’actions du corps ny des iambes:
c’est pourquoy il doit continuellement travailler à cacher tant les aides que les chastimens, & les faire
les moins apparents qu’il pourra: car à veritablement parler, il n’y a rien qui choque plus la veuë des
regardans que ces vilaines aides & ce branlement de corps & de jambes, c’est ce qui me fait prier ceux
qui auront cette mauvaise grace, de faire leur possible pour s’en corriger.” Delcampe, Art de monter à
cheval, 279-280. Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 142-143, and Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 106-107,
152, express very similar sentiments.
310
In the following passage, La Broue paints the portrait of a class of rider
whose overt bobbing and weaving is almost as absurd as the one portrayed by
Pluvinel. Here La Broue confirms that, as suspected, the ungraceful rider will be
laughed at:
I would like all [the rider’s] actions on horseback to look good or be
necessary, in contrast to most of those who get involved in training horses
and who, when giving them a lesson or when making them perform some air
or another, mark the tempo and the rhythm with a certain movement of their
head, which accompanies every hoof beat of the horse as it performs. When
they want to arch [the horse’s] neck, bring its head down, or turn its nose to
one side or the other, they arch their own neck and tuck in their own chin, or
turn their head and their face, almost showing by their own silly facial
expressions the face that they want the horse to make. If they want to send it
forward, their initial action with their body and both arms is so great that they
almost put their stomach on top of the pommel of the saddle; when they want
it to halt, they lean over backward all of a sudden, as if they were ready to fall
on its croup; when they give an aid or a correction with a leg or a spur on one
side or the other, they lean and sway so much from one part and the other that
there often are some, amongst those who are watching them most attentively,
who cannot stop themselves from accompanying [these riders] with some
similar movement of body and members or from laughing at the sight of such
overly supple and farcical behaviors, which would be more appropriate to the
clown in a theatrical comedy than they are necessary to the correct schooling
of the horse.
463
463
“[I]e voudrois … qu’estant à cheval toutes ses actions fussent belles ou necessaires: au contaire de
la pluspart de ceux, qui se meslent de dresser les chevaux, lesquels en leur donnant leçon, ou en les
faisant manier de quelque air qu’ils allent, marquent les temps & les mesures avec un certain
mouvement de teste, qui accompagnent toutes les batues que le cheval fait en son manege. Et quand
ils luy veulent dresser le col, ramener la teste, ou tourner le nez de quelque costé, ils se ramenent &
s’arment eux mesmes, ou tournent leur teste, & leur visage, mostrans [sic] presque par leurs grimaces,
la contenance qu’ils desirent que le cheval face: & s’ils le veulent chasser en avant, on leur void la
premiere action si grande avec le corps & les deux bras, qu’ils mettent quasi le ventre dessus la teste
de l’harçon de la selle: & le voulant arrester, se renversent tout à coup, comme s’ils estoient prests à
cheoir sur la croupe: & quand ils aydent ou chastient de la iambe ou de l’esperon de quelque costé, ils
se panchent & se balancent si fort d’une part & d’autre, qu’il y a souvent aucuns de ceux, qui sont
plus ententifs à les contempler, qui ne se peuvent empescher de les accompagner par quelque
semblable action de corps & de membres, ou de rire, voyans telles souplesses & boufonnes façons de
faire, que seroyent plus propres à faire le pantalon à la comedie, qu’elles ne sont necessaires à la
bonne escolle du cheval.” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:47.
311
La Noue is even more blunt and decisive on this issue: “Grace is so necessary to the
horseman that, without it, he will find himself mocked rather than lauded in good
company….”
464
Grace alone was not enough, however, for the rider who aspired to a truly
ideal appearance; he also had to perform sprezzatamente, or in a fashion that belied
the months or years of diligent labor he had invested in learning to ride so well that it
seemed his skilled and graceful performance required no effort at all. La Noue
makes the following recommendation to the aspiring noble horseman: “The
gentleman … must begin early to master this, so that his schooling renders him so
adroit … that his dexterity appears entirely inborn….”
465
Some modern scholars also
have remarked on the relationship specifically between aristocratic mounted
performance and the concept that one of the primary purposes of sprezzatura is to
conceal the time and labor the rider has invested in order to arrive at a level of skill
and grace that allows his performance to appear utterly effortless. For example,
speaking of Pluvinel’s detailed descriptions of all the skill, knowledge, and personal
character traits that the rider must deploy to be considered a good horseman, Marie-
Christine Mégret-Lacan points out that “‘hidden artistry’ … is the consequence of all
464
“La grace est si necessaire au Cavalier, que sans icelle il se trouve plustost moqué, que loüé és
bonnes compagnies….” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 32. Motley, Becoming a
French Aristocrat, 134, 142, cites two additional contemporary sources who concur that those who
did not ride well would be mocked at court.
465
“Faut-il que le Gentilhomme … commence de bonne heure à s’y façonner, à fin que l’école le
rende si adroit …, qu’il semble que la dexterité soit née avec luy….” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie
françoise et italienne, 145. La Noue actually is speaking here of tilting and running at the ring, but
his words are just as applicable to horsemanship in general as they are to mounted games in particular.
312
this preparatory work.”
466
Raber expresses a similar sentiment, expanding it to
include all the background labor—equally unacknowledged—that goes into the
finished performance:
The art of dressage [manège equitation] … strives above all to conceal the
labor of the rider and the host of trainers, grooms, farriers, and others who
contribute to the horse’s training and upkeep, so that the monarch’s or
aristocrat’s authority can be evidenced in his superior horsemanship and the
sprezzatura of his artistry.
467
All the authors of the manuals concur that the rider should display an air of
casual nonchalance, and they also say that he always should appear as if what he is
doing is pleasant and easy. He must never reveal, either by his expression or by his
movements, that he feels nervous or unsure. Instead, he must appear relaxed and
happy at all times, exhibiting the greatest of ease in all his actions, no matter what
his horse may be doing. La Noue says, for example, that the rider should show a
face that is smiling, rather than severe and scowling. Both Delcampe and La Broue
emphasize that the rider should display no constraint whatsoever in any of his
actions; instead, everything he does should appear easy and facile.
468
Pluvinel is
even more specific:
It is one of the most required elements for the horseman to have a smiling
face, occasionally looking at the audience while scarcely turning his head to
466
“L’‘art caché’ … est la conséquence de tout ce travail préalable.” Mégret-Lacan, “Naissance de
l’art équestre,” 534.
467
Raber, “Reasonable Creatures,” 54.
468
P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 32, says that the rider should show “plustotst un
visage riant, que severe & refroigné”; Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 10, says that the rider should
have “point de contrainte en aucune de ses actions”; La Broue says that the rider should perform “sans
se contraindre aucunement” (Cavalerice françois, 1:123) and that “il faut que le chevalier … ne se
monstre aucunement contraint, mais plustost qu’il face paroistre une grande facilité en toutes ses
actions” (Cavalerice françois, 1:47).
313
one side or the other, so that this gaiety makes known that he is not the
slightest bit uneasy about what he is doing.
469
As always, the purpose of this carefree lack of constraint is to keep the
spectators happy. La Noue specifies that “he who wishes to be a professional
horseman must above all things develop beautiful bearing, so as to be more pleasing
to those who will see him perform….”
470
Pluvinel and Delcampe take all this one
step further, stating that the true pinnacle of perfection is a horse that appears to be
performing of its own volition rather than at its rider’s behest. Pluvinel reiterates this
maxim several times in his text; his most definitive statement on the topic is as
follows:
In order to be graceful while riding his horse, the rider must never … make
his aids apparent, in order to oblige those who are watching him to believe
that his horse is so kind and well trained that it is working all by itself of its
own volition and almost like a miracle of nature, which is truly the perfection
of horse and rider.
471
Delcampe is, if anything, even more lyrical than Pluvinel:
469
“[C]’est une des parties tres-requise au Chevalier d’avoir la face riante en regardant quelquesfois la
compagnie, sans la gueres tourner ny çà ny là, afin que cette gayeté face cognoistre qu’il n’est point
embarassé en ce qu’il fait.” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 12.
470
“[C]eluy qui veut faire profession de Cavalerie doit sur toutes choses se former un beau maintien, à
fin de complaire autant à ceux qui le voiront travailler….” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et
italienne, 32.
471
“[L]e Chevalier pour avoir bonne grace en faisant manier son cheval, ne doit point … faire
paroistre les … aydes pour obliger ceux qui le regardent à croire que son cheval est si gentil & si bien
dressé, qu’il va tout seul de sa bonne volonté, & quasi comme un miracle en nature, qui est
veritablement la perfection du Chevalier & du cheval.” Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 120-121.
Elsewhere, Pluvinel says: “[I]l faut qu’ils aillent sans qu’on cognoisse que le Chevalier face aucune
action de force ny de contrainte …”; “[Des] qu’il manie de science, & qu’il soit asseuré de sa
cadance: … le Chevalier diminuera toutes les aydes, en sorte que les regardans puissent dire
veritablement que le cheval est si gentil & bien dressé, qu’il manie tout seul….” Pluvinel, Instruction
du Roy, 58, 139-140, respectively.
314
In a word, if the horse could perform solely from the rider’s force of mind,
without anyone perceiving any aid or correction, he would have found the
true Philosopher’s Stone and the final secret in the art of horseback riding.
472
As all the passages in this chapter show, grace and sprezzatura were just as
important to a successful mounted performance as the qualities of martial vertu. In
some respects, they were even more important. The noble horseman had to deploy
his virtue primarily in order to coax a technically correct performance out of his
horse, but unless and until he also imbued that performance with grace and
sprezzatura, he never would elicit the esteem and admiration of his audience.
Without first gaining the approbation of his peers, he never would achieve the
desired boost to his reputation—not just as a skilled horseman, but also as a
nobleman who possessed all of the qualities that he and his peers associated with
genuine noblesse.
472
“En un mot si le cheval pouvoit manier de la seule vigueur de l’homme, sans que l’on s’apperceust
d’aucune aide ou chastiment, il auroit trouvé la vraye pierre Philosophale, & le dernier secret en l’art
de monter à cheval.” Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 280.
315
CHAPTER 11
Grace, Sprezzatura, and the Capriole
All of the maxims outlined in the previous chapter regarding the importance
of grace and sprezzatura when riding were doubly applicable to the capriole. This
movement represented the highest form of “display” horsemanship, in that one of its
primary functions was to provide the most spectacular possible platform for the rider
to show off in front of an admiring audience of his peers. As explained in Chapter
Ten, in order to fulfill that function, the rider and his mount first and foremost had to
be pleasing to watch. Spectator pleasure was predicated on the quality of the
performance, which in turn was predicated on both the technical correctness of the
movement and the grace and sprezzatura with which it was executed. As shown in
Part Three, technical correctness rested primarily on the rider’s skill, knowledge,
experience, strength, courage, judgment, and all the other qualities comprising noble
vertu. Grace and sprezzatura, on the other hand, were largely a by-product of the
rider’s pretty seat and smiling face, which—assuming the rider was mounted on a
fully trained and completely obedient horse—could exist independently of skill. The
one exception to this general rule was the capriole. Because of the nature of both the
movement itself and the type of horse capable of performing it, the rider first had to
possess the skills and qualities needed to create technical correctness before he could
even hope to aspire to grace and sprezzatura. As a result, the capriole, when
performed to the stringent standards of perfection outlined in the sources, was
regarded as the pinnacle of gentlemanly achievements.
316
Pluvinel, Menou, and Delcampe all express similar sentiments on the special
status of this air. Here Menou is speaking:
During victory parades, magnificent occasions, ceremonial entries, and a
thousand other places, there is nothing that creates more contentment and
admiration amongst the viewers and that better shows off an upright and
skillful rider than a horse performing well in the capriole, which is the most
beautiful of all the airs, in that its height confers more quality to the air. It
thus is the most rare, and the rarest things are ordinarily the most highly
esteemed. On top of all of that, the perfection of the good rider is known by
his ability to train horses in this air much more than in the other airs, because
of the difficulties inherent in those [horses] that are capable of doing it….
473
As was the case with riding in general, the purpose of the capriole thus is three-fold:
first, to display the rider’s beauty, grace, and sprezzatura; second, to please those
who watch him as a result of that display; and third, to earn their admiration and
esteem as a by-product of that pleasure. Unlike riding in general, however, the
capriole also highlights the rider’s skill and his ability as a trainer, thus underscoring
the unique status of this particular movement.
In order to achieve any of these interrelated goals, both horse and rider first
and foremost must perform with grace. As already discussed, the rider cannot be
graceful if his mount is not, but ultimately the grace of the horse is the rider’s
473
“[D]ans les triomphes & dans les magnificences, aux entrées & en mille autres endroits, il n’y a
rien qui donne tant de contentement & d’admiration aux regardans, & qui fasse tant paroistre un
Cavalier bien droit & bien adroit, qu’un Cheval bien maniant à capriolles, qui est le plus beau de tous
les airs …, en ce que s’élevant davantage en haut il participe plus de la qualité de l’air; qu’ainsi il est
plus rare, & que les choses les plus rares sont ordinairement les plus estimées, joint qu’outre tout cela
la perfection du bon Cavalier se connoist à reduire les Chevaux de cét air bien plus qu’aux autres airs,
pour les difficultez qui se trouvent à ceux qui sont capables d’y fournir….” Menou, Pratique du
cavalier, 146-147. Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 138, and Delcampe, Art de monter à cheval, 263-
264, express similar sentiments. La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:174, agrees that the ability to ride
and train a typical caprioleur in its chosen air is the surest sign of a truly gifted horseman: “[U]n des
plus extremes & violens exercices, que le cheval de carriere puisse faire, est celuy des sauts, à cause
de quoy le Cavalerice ne sçauroit rendre une plus belle preuve de sa patience, & de son sçavoir, que
de maintenir le cheval sauteur long temps en bonne & iuste escole, mesmement si de sa nature il est
colere & fort sensible.”
317
responsibility: through his skilled (and graceful) handling, he can create an
environment in which the horse’s natural brilliance and athleticism will be able to
emerge; on the other hand, through lack of skill (or grace), he can equally well
prevent his mount from performing up to the desired standard. As indicated above,
all of this is doubly true for the capriole, a movement so difficult and demanding that
any mistakes on the part of the rider can derail the entire process. La Broue points
out what can happen if the rider’s body is unstable, if his seat is weak, or if he cannot
control his heels while performing the capriole:
Since the bridle arm is attached to the body, there is absolutely no doubt that,
if the action of the horse shakes up and discommodes the body, or if out of
bad habit the body accedes too much to the horse’s action because of some
feebleness or debility, the proper support of the bridle often will be shaken
and falsified by the excessive movement of the body…. In addition, even
when the rider has his back, shoulders, arms, and hand in the right place, if he
nonetheless has a seat so weak that, being unable to withstand the violence of
the jumps, he loses control of his legs, so much so that at every jump he is in
disorder, breaking the rhythm of the horse rather than helping it and making
it easier for it to sustain its good performance, or if [the rider] has a heel that
is so lively or so harsh that, instead of taking advantage of his horse’s
inclinations, … with a moderate spur aid, he pushes it into despair or some
other vice, then in such cases the aptness and temperature of his hand will not
serve much purpose.
474
La Noue agrees that a weak seat can wreak havoc on a capriole:
474
“[P]uis que le bras de la bride tient au corps, il ne faut point douter, que si l’action du cheval
esbranle, & incommode le corps, ou si par mauvaise habitude le corps consent trop par quelque
molesse ou debilité, à l’action du cheval, le vray soustien de la bride ne soit souvent esbranlé &
falcifié, par l’excessif mouvement du corps…. D’autre-part quand bien le Cavalerice aura les reins,
les espaules, le bras & la main en bonne situation & que neantmoins il aye l’assiette si foible, que ne
pouvant resister à la violence des sauts, les iambes luy eschappent, mesmes qu’il se trouve à tous les
coups en desordre, rompant plustost le temps au cheval, que luy apporter ayde & commodité pour
bien soustenir son bon air: ou s’il a le talon si gaillard, & si aspre que au lieu de se prevaloir de la
disposition du cheval, … par l’ayde mediocre des esperons, il le pousse à un desespoir, ou en quelque
autre vice: en telles fautes la iustesse & temperature de la main, ne servira pas beaucoup.” La Broue,
Cavalerice françois, 1:172.
318
The contact with the bit could become faulty or be dropped if [the rider] was
so weak in the saddle that he was forced to accede to the vigorous
movements of the horse, so much so that, being unable to sustain the elevated
action, he soon would find himself defeated by the horse….
475
Although all the authors do acknowledge that flaws in the rider’s position can
have a bad impact on the horse’s ability to perform a capriole, their main concern
again seems to be the rider’s appearance while it is doing so. They emphasize that
the rider must be able to maintain the ideal posture throughout the horse’s efforts, as
it is only when he does so that he will be able to achieve the requisite degree of
graceful nonchalance. In the capriole, as in riding more generally, the primary
criteria for the correct position and thus for rider grace are that his movements be as
minimal as possible and that his aids be so subtle as to be nearly invisible. As
Pluvinel and Menou already pointed out in Chapter Nine, however, “in this
movement … the motion is more incommodious than any other action that one can
ask [the horse] to perform….”
476
It therefore is far more difficult for the rider to
retain his position during this air, so the “minimalist” approach advocated above
becomes rather problematic. The dilemma this presents to the rider hoping to
achieve the elusive ideal of grace and sprezzatura while performing the capriole is
confirmed by the detailed descriptions in the treatises of precisely what the rider is to
475
“[L]’appuy de la [main] pourroit estre faucé ou abandonné s’il estoit si foible en selle, qu’il fust
contraint de consentir aux nerveux mouvemens du cheval, si bien que n’en pouvant soutenir l’action
relevée, il se voiroit bien-tost vaincu du cheval….” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne,
138.
476
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 123; Menou, Pratique du cavalier, 116; see n. 438, above, for the full
quote.
319
do with each part of his body during each phase of the movement. Here is La
Noue’s advice:
When the horse is raising its forehand, the rider must be straight and firm in
the saddle. When it is lifting its haunches and lashing out with its hind legs,
he must put his shoulders back a bit, steadying and bracing himself strongly
against the stirrups, in order to better support the disposition of the jump,
never abandoning the tension of the hand, in order to give [the horse] the help
it needs … to go back up again easily and thereby to continue the exercise
with the same form and tempo.
477
La Broue says very similar things about the rider’s position while performing
the capriole but adds crucial caveats having to do with his “paraître,” or his
appearance as it is experienced and reacted to by his audience:
In order to make himself stronger and more correct in the saddle, the rider
will hold his body firm and straight, in its natural frame, while the horse is
raising its forehand. When it is lifting its haunches and lashing out with its
hind legs, the rider will put his shoulders back a bit, without turning his head
to one side or the other and without abandoning the action of his whip hand,
while bracing his back [against the cantle of the saddle] in such a pleasing
fashion that those who are watching him will scarcely be able to perceive this
action, which must be equally accompanied by the proper posture of the
bridle arm and hand….
478
In La Broue’s version of these instructions to the rider, it thus is not enough for the
rider merely to maintain the stability of his seat, body, legs, and bridle hand
477
“[L]ors que le cheval leve le devant, le Cavalier doit estre droit & ferme en selle; & quand il
hausse le derriere & en épare, il doit un peu reculer les épaules en arriere s’anervant & se roidissant
fort sur les étrieux, à fin d’en soútenir mieux la disposition du saut, n’abandonnant iamais la forme
tenuë de la main, pour luy presenter l’ayde qu’il doit avoir … pour se relever facilement à fin de
continuer l’exercice de mesme ton & mesure.” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 140;
see also 138.
478
“[P]our se rendre plus propre, & plus fort dedans la selle, le Cavalerice tiendra le corps ferme &
droit, en son plan naturel, cependant que le cheval levera le devant, & quand il haussera le derriere, &
qu’il esparera, le Cavalerice se trouvera les espaules un peu reculées, sans tourner la teste d’un costé
ny d’autre, & sans abandonner le mouvement du bras de la gaule. Mais en se roidissant sur les reins
si accortement, qu’à peine ceux qui le regarderont se puissent apercevoir de ceste action, laquelle doit
estre également accompagnée de la iuste posture du bras, & du poing de la bride….” La Broue,
Cavalerice françois, 1:173; see also 1:171, 1:172.
320
throughout the jump; he also must be cognizant of his observers. He must avoid
turning his head, an action that clearly fell under the heading of “excessive
movement” and therefore was considered unbecoming. He must be sure not to
forget about his right arm and hand, which hold the whip and which, though not
actively involved in the process once the horse becomes airborne, are supposed to be
held in a casually graceful manner throughout the movement rather than being
allowed to droop, list, or otherwise behave in a way that would detract from the
perfection of the capriole. Finally, when pushing down into his stirrups and bracing
himself against the back of the saddle to stabilize his seat at the height of the jump,
the rider is to do so in such an elegantly subtle fashion that the spectators can barely
discern his effort. All of these details have to do with the rider’s grace and
sprezzatura, which are the foundation of his paraître.
In the previous chapter, we saw that under most circumstances a graceful and
sprezzata performance is even more important than a skillful one: as long as the
rider looks good while he is doing whatever he is doing, a less-than-perfect
knowledge of horsemanship may be overlooked. With the capriole, however, this is
no longer the case: the elaborate descriptions of the rider’s position underline the
fact that this air is so demanding, for both horse and rider, that skill in the saddle is a
fundamental prerequisite for grace and perhaps especially for sprezzatura.
Nonetheless, when they are discussing various things the rider ought not to do when
attempting the capriole, these authors are just as likely to point out that a given
action is malséant (unbecoming or indecorous) as that it reflects a lack of skill or will
321
hamper the horse’s efforts. The citation above from La Broue already has provided
one example of actions to be avoided because they are unbecoming; two more of his
examples follow. Here La Broue is speaking of excessive use of the spurs to get the
horse to perform the capriole, which is both malséant and disruptive to the horse’s
efforts:
This action … is unseemly, for when one sees the rider with his heels hooked
up by the [horse’s] flanks while the horse is lifting its haunches and lashing
out with its hind legs, he more closely resembles a grotesque than a well-
proportioned man. If the spur aid is made normally, around the mid-barrel
and next to the [horse’s] stomach, the rider will be straight, the horse less
afflicted, and the jump more clear, steady, and easy. For when the jump, no
matter how high it may be, is performed according to the finest and most
precise proportions, the rider’s seat is never unsettled by it.
479
In the next passage, La Broue addresses the excessive use of the voice. In this
example, the rider is accused not only of disrupting the horse and lacking grace but
also of irritating his viewers:
I want … the voice aid to be used modestly and with consideration, and not
in imitation of certain horsemen who, like deaf persons, make such extreme
yells when raising the horse that, instead of supporting it or augmenting its
courage and lightness (as can be done with a proper, light-hearted voice aid),
they confuse it and often throw it into disorder. In addition, instead of giving
grace to the exercise with this voice, they annoy the spectators and sometimes
get confused themselves….
480
479
“[L]’action … est mal seante: car quand l’on void le chevalier ainsi accroché, ayant les talons si
pres des fesses, cependant que le cheval hausse le derriere, & qu’il separe [sic; espare?], il ressemble
mieux une crotesque qu’un homme bien proportionné. Mais si l’ayde des esperons, se fait
ordinairement environ le mitan, & au costé du ventre, le chevalier en sera plus droit, le cheval moins
affligé, & le saut plus net, plus égal, & plus facile. Car quand le saut, tant haut puisse-il estre, est fait
selon les plus belles & iustes proportions, l’assiette du bon chevalier n’en est iamais incommodée.”
La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:172-173.
480
“[I]e veux … que l’ayde de la voix soit faicte modestement, & avec consideration, & non à
l’imitation de certains chevaliers, qui comme estourdis font des cris si extremes en haulssant le
cheval, qu’au lieu de luy soustenir, ou augmenter le courage & la legeresse, (comme il se peut par la
vraye ayde de la voix alegre,) ils le troublent & mettent souvent en desordre, & outre ce, au lieu de
donner grace à l’exercice par ceste voix, ils faschent les assistans, & quelquefois se confondent eux-
mesmes….” La Broue, Cavalerice françois, 1:173.
322
Pluvinel reiterates many of the maxims already cited: the aids should be
nearly invisible, the rider should maintain the correct position throughout the jump,
and the pleasure of the audience is paramount. He says:
As soon as the horse is working knowledgeably and is confirmed in its
cadence …, the rider will diminish all his aids so that … [he] can remain
correct in the saddle in his proper position, whereas if he had to cue the horse
at every step, both rider and horse would be so disconcerted that they would
no longer do anything worthwhile, which would be greatly displeasing to the
spectators.
481
As did La Broue in his admonition against shouting at one’s horse, in this passage
Pluvinel also hints at another key factor that the rider intent on performing the
capriole has to keep at the forefront of his mind: if he fails to do any of these things,
he not only will not please his audience and earn their admiration and esteem, but he
will actively displease and annoy them. As these authors already have indicated
when discussing riding in general, the rider then will become a target for the ridicule,
derision, and mockery of his peers, and his reputation will suffer accordingly.
As shown in Chapter Nine, the capriole was universally considered to be the
most difficult of the airs relevés. As Pluvinel, Menou, and Delcampe pointed out at
the beginning of this chapter, because of its challenging nature, it also was
considered to be the most rare of all the airs. They also noted that, because of this
rarity, it was held in higher esteem. The capriole’s very difficulty thus increased its
481
“[Des] qu’il manie de science, & qu’il soit asseuré de sa cadance: … le Chevalier diminuera toutes
les aydes, en sorte que … le Chevalier puisse demeurer juste dans la selle en sa bonne posture,
d’autant que s’il falloit ayder le cheval à tous les temps, le Chevalier & le cheval seroient tellement
desconsertez qu’ils ne feroient plus rien qui vaille, chose qui desplairoit grandement aux spectateurs.”
Pluvinel, Instruction du Roy, 139-140.
323
potential to garner esteem and incite admiration. From everything the authors have
said thus far, however, it is clear that the esteem accorded to such rare and difficult
things is predicated on their quality. Rare and difficult things are respected and
admired only when they are done well—that is, with skill, grace, and sprezzatura.
Here again, these ideas regarding the relationship between rare or difficult
things, correct performance, and the esteem of others reflect the influence of
Castiglione. In The Book of the Courtier, he says quite bluntly:
Everyone knows the difficulty of those things that are rare and well done, and
therefore facility in them excites the highest admiration; while on the other
hand, to strive … is extremely ungraceful, and makes us esteem everything
slightly, however great it be.
482
As Castiglione makes clear, it is not just the rarity of an activity but also the quality
of its execution that excites admiration. Quality is a result of doing that rare activity
both well and with “facility”—that is, both skillfully and with that easy and graceful
nonchalance that are the hallmarks of sprezzatura. It thus is this unique combination
of rarity, difficulty, skill, and elegant and effortless execution that makes an act
estimable. If even one of these elements is lacking, then the level of esteem drops
accordingly, or—in the case of a truly inept and graceless performance in which the
effort required is glaringly apparent—esteem vanishes completely.
More than one scholar has commented on the influence of Castiglione’s ideas
on the concepts of grace and sprezzatura specifically in the context of manège
equitation as practiced by the early modern French nobility at the newly instituted
académies. Hale notes that “the influence of Castiglione’s notion of sprezzatura is
482
Castiglione, Book of the Courtier, 35.
324
very strong in the riding literature” in general; more specifically to the French case,
he points out that at Pluvinel’s academy “a man could learn to ride with the
controlled nonchalence [sic] that had become the hallmark of gentlemanly
accomplishments” and that had come straight out of The Book of the Courtier.
483
Mégret-Lacan makes repeated references in her article on Pluvinel’s Instruction du
Roy to Castiglione and the influence of his ideas regarding “désinvolture,” which she
says is “the [French] translation of choice for the very important concept of
sprezzatura.”
484
She reminds us that Castiglione’s definition of that term may be
summarized as “l’art de cacher l’art” (the art of hiding one’s artistry) or, as
Castiglione himself says,
a certain nonchalance that shall conceal design and show that what is done
and said is done without effort and almost without thought…. Accordingly
we may affirm … to be true art [that] which does not appear to be art….
485
Mégret-Lacan cites extensively from Pluvinel to demonstrate the presence of
Castiglione’s theory of “art caché” in his teachings. She summarizes:
The aesthetics of “concealed art” was codified by Castiglione in The Book of
the Courtier and appropriated by Pluvinel…. The art of concealed art is the
objective of the rider and the horse, and this cultural-aesthetic code is
indissociably linked to the notion of politeness [politesse]….
The appropriation of these seventeenth-century cultural and aesthetic
codes is a specificity of the equestrian art. Pluvinel introduces them into the
training of the horse, which thus becomes a being endowed with
understanding and which he wants to persuade rather than constrain by force.
483
Hale, “Military Education,” 245 n. 62, 236, respectively. In the note, Hale offers an example of
the presence of Castiglione’s concept of “controlled nonchalance” (sprezzatura) in a contemporary
Italian manual of horsemanship. Alessandro Massari Malatesta, Compendio dell’arte di cavalleria
(Venice: Francesco Bolzatta, 1600), fo. 6
v
, says that riding “deve adoprare arte & industria, ma in
termine che dimostri esser fatta senza fatica e sforzo, quasi dotato natural grazia, coprendo l’arte con
l’istessa arte.”
484
Mégret-Lacan, “Naissance de l’art équestre,” 527 n. 9.
485
Mégret-Lacan, “Naissance de l’art équestre,” 534 n. 26; Castiglione, Book of the Courtier, 34-35.
325
The movement performed thus becomes a totally cultural movement, even if
for the riders the movements performed are natural ones. In this discussion,
the notion of “concealed art” has a fundamental consequence, linked to the
aesthetics of naturalness: grace. The couple must be graceful. Grace is one
of the essential attributes of the courtier….
486
In Pluvinel’s academy, as in Castiglione’s text, grace and sprezzatura—that art of
hiding one’s artistry—are indissolubly linked. The movements of the manège can be
graceful only when they appear natural, and they can appear natural only when they
seem effortless, not just for the rider but also for the horse.
When this concept of art caché—of effortless effort—is applied to the
capriole, it becomes more understandable why spectators were especially intolerant
of clumsy ineptitude on the part of a rider attempting this particular rare and difficult
thing. Just as “there is nothing that creates more contentment and admiration
amongst the viewers and that better shows off an upright and skillful rider than a
486
“L’esthétique de ‘l’art caché’ est une réappropriation de Pluvinel et a été codifié par B. Castiglione
dans le Livre du Courtisan…. L’art de cacher l’art est l’objectif du cavalier et du cheval, et ce code
esthético-culturel est indissociablement lié à la notion de politesse…. [New paragraph] La
réappropriation de ces codes culturels et esthétiques du XVII
e
siècle est une spécificité de l’art
équestre. Pluvinel les introduit dans le dressage du cheval qui devient ainsi un être doué
d’entendement et qu’il veut persuader et non contraindre par la force. Le movement exécuté devient
alors un movement totalement culturel même si pour ces cavaliers les mouvements exécutés sont des
mouvements naturels. Dans cet entretien la notion d’‘art caché’ a une conséquence primordiale, liée à
cette esthétique du naturel: la grâce. Le couple doit être gracieux. La grâce est un des attributs
essentiels du courtisan….” Mégret-Lacan, “Naissance de l’art équestre,” 543-544. This scholar is
particularly insistent regarding what she sees as the symbiotic relationship between equestrian grace
and sprezzatura and those concepts as they applied more broadly to seventeenth-century French noble
culture: “La Renaissance italienne a défini un idéal de grâce inspiré de l’éthique cavalière ce qui nous
a permis de déduire que le XVII
e
siècle a prôné comme modèle esthético-culturel la ‘désinvolture
élégante du cavalier’. Les codes esthétiques et culturels du XVII
e
siècle sont liés à l’esthétique de
l’art équestre et cet art s’est approprié ces codes: codes courtois et codes équestres semblent alors se
chevaucher.” Mégret-Lacan, “Naissance de l’art équestre,” 527-528. Several other scholars mention
sprezzatura or désinvolture in the context of manège horsemanship without specifically identifying its
source as Castiglione; see, for example, Raber, “Reasonable Creatures,” 54; Doucet, “Académies
équestres,” 138.
326
horse performing well in the capriole,”
487
so there is nothing more likely to generate
their ridicule, derision, and mockery than a graceless and incompetent rider whose
lack of sprezzatura is revealed by the blatantly obvious aids he is forced to use,
simply in order to get his horse to perform one badly. Given the potential
repercussions that such a judgment by his peers might have on the reputation of an
early modern French nobleman, it thus is even more important for the rider to work
continually to hide his aids and to maintain his good posture when performing the
capriole than when performing any other air.
A large part of the reason that a French nobleman’s peers were apt to judge
him so harshly for what might seem a relatively minor flaw is that a graceless
performance of the capriole also reflected badly on his vertu. For example, La Noue
links the need for the rider to maintain the correct position throughout the capriole
directly to his judgment, which was one of the central characteristics of traditional
noble virtue. La Noue reminds us that in this air the rider should accompany the
horse’s motion in such a way that “he seems to be glued to the saddle, without
leaning too far forward when it is lifting off … and without leaning so far back that
487
This sentiment is expressed by Pluvinel, Menou, and Delcampe; see n. 473, above, for the full
quote. La Broue and La Noue say much the same thing about un pas et un saut, which of course
included the capriole (the saut) but also included a lower air such a the courbette, terre à terre, or
mesair (the pas). The overall point, however, remains the same: it is only when this rare and difficult
air is performed with grace and sprezzatura that it will enhance the rider’s paraître and earn the
admiration of his audience. The quotes from La Broue and La Noue are as follows: “[I]l me semble
que [l’air] d’un pas, & un saut … est aussi celuy qui fait mieux paroistre le chevalier à l’entrée de
quelque tournoy, ou mascarade faite à cheval: car cest air apporte plus de furie, de gaillardise, & ie ne
sçay quoy de plus apparent & Martial, que ne font tous les autres….” La Broue, Cavalerice françois,
1:140. “L’air d’un pas & un saut … fait paroistre le Cavalier de meilleure grace à l’entrée de quelque
tournoy, & mascarade, pour estre accompagné de quelque fougue, & fureur Martiale plus que les
autres, & d’une si naïve gentilesse qu’il ne laisse que du plaisir, & de l’admiration à la compagnie qui
le voit gayement effectuer.” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 136.
327
he touches the cantle with his back,” all while timing his aids in a way that will allow
him simultaneously to maintain his position and “to support his horse in a noble and
pleasant disposition.” The reason he must do this, La Noue stipulates, is “in order to
show his judgment and dexterity.”
488
In other words, the rider’s correct position
demonstrates not only his skill, grace, and sprezzatura, which are visible to the
naked eye, but it also demonstrates his vertu: it is his good judgment that allows him
to recognize not just how but when to apply his aids so that he can follow the violent
motion of his horse without losing his seat.
Once again, the influence of Castiglione can be discerned: the relationship
between good judgment, grace, and sprezzatura also is much emphasized in The
Book of the Courtier. In this case as in previous examples, the very similar notions
that appear in the manuals of horsemanship reflect the impact of Castiglione’s ideal
on the traditional French nobility’s evolving beliefs about the meaning of noblesse
during this period. In the medieval warrior-knight ideal, judgment was something a
nobleman employed in battle and other situations of similar weight and importance.
The judgment of Castiglione’s ideal courtier, on the other hand, serves primarily to
facilitate the overarching concepts of grace and sprezzatura, allowing him to apply
those concepts at all times and to all activities. The courtier is instructed to use his
judgment to determine in which areas of endeavor he truly excels, not just in terms
488
“[I]l semble estre colé dedans la selle, sans s’avancer trop sur le devant lors qu’il se leve, comme
quelques-uns font de fort mauvaise grace, & sans aussi se ramener tant en arriere qu’il en touche
l’arçon du dos, & faisant si bien ces aydes à temps, & par mesure, que l’un n’empéche point l’autre, à
fin de monstrer son iugement & sa dexterité, & d’entretenir son cheval en une noble & plaisante
disposition.” P. de la Noue, Cavalerie françoise et italienne, 128.
328
of simple skill but also in terms of the ability to express that skill in a graceful
fashion, to recognize when, where, and before whom his grace and talent may be
displayed to their best advantage, and to “manage” his opportunities to perform so
that they appear to be the result of spontaneous chance rather than of the courtier’s
careful planning and preparation.
489
As expressed in The Book of the Courtier, the
very meaning of “good judgment” thus has changed profoundly in comparison to the
role it had played in traditional martial vertu.
In the manuals of horsemanship, judgment seems to be used in both the old
and the new way. The noble rider must use his judgment much as he would in battle:
to contain where possible the perils that are a fundamental part of the activity in
which he is engaging and, where containment is not possible, to react to them in an
appropriate fashion. He also, however, must use his judgment in precisely the ways
outlined by Castiglione: to assess which movements he can perform with the levels
of grace and sprezzatura necessary to be lauded and admired rather scorned and
criticized, on which horses, and under which circumstances. Like horsemanship
itself, judgment thus served as a bridge between the nobility’s old sense of identity
and its emerging new one.
Much the same thing in fact can be said about the relationship between
virtually all the aspects of traditional martial virtue and the newly added qualities of
grace and sprezzatura, especially in the context of the capriole. As discussed in
Chapter Nine, this movement more than any other had the potential to call into play
489
For some examples of Castiglione’s advice regarding the use of judgment in the service of grace
and sprezzatura, see The Book of the Courtier, 58-59, 79-85, 113-115.
329
every facet of a nobleman’s vertu, simply in order to produce a technically correct
performance. As argued at the beginning of this chapter, in this particular movement
grace and sprezzatura could not happen until technical correctness was in place: the
capriole was far too unforgiving for a pretty rider and his smiling countenance to
slide by on the mere appearance of skill. That being the case, an awkward and
laborious performance could reflect not just the rider’s lack of judgment but also his
lack of prudence, wisdom, discretion, foresight, resolve, patience, resourcefulness,
inventiveness, skill, knowledge, experience, courage, daring, strength, ability to
adjust in the face of change, or capacity to think clearly and respond quickly when
under pressure. All of the qualities of noblesse—both new and old—were necessary
for the successful execution of the capriole.
As this chapter has shown, in the eyes of traditional early modern French
nobles, the capriole encompassed a unique combination of rarity, danger, difficulty,
and beauty. Because of its unique nature, this movement provided an unparalleled
platform for a nobleman to display both his martial vertu and his natural grace.
More than anything else, however, the unique nature of this movement offered the
ultimate opportunity for him to display his sprezzatura. Based on the description of
the movement, it is clear that performing a capriole simply without falling off would
be more than a little challenging, even for a highly skilled rider; performing one with
grace would be even more demanding. To go one step beyond grace and to perform
this extremely difficult movement with that air of casual nonchalance that indicated
to all who watched that this petty little nothing of a maneuver was no more difficult
330
than trotting a circle indeed would be to achieve the height of sprezzatura. When all
these factors are taken into consideration, it is easy to understand why the correct
performance of the capriole was viewed as the pinnacle of gentlemanly
achievements.
* * *
It is because of its special status that the capriole has been used to illustrate
this study’s argument that manège equitation and the mounted games related to it
simultaneously served as a source of comforting continuity and as a vibrant vehicle
for change. In Part Three, the continuity side of this picture was examined in
considerable detail, and the ways in which a variety of movements could at any
moment demand that the rider deploy some aspect of his vertu were presented and
discussed. The fact that the role of grace and sprezzatura—the change side of the
picture—was not examined at the same level of detail does not mean that manège
movements other than the capriole did not provide the same sorts of opportunities
for noble riders to deploy these more recently added qualities of noblesse. As the
sources made abundantly clear in Chapter Ten, the noble horseman who indulged in
this type of riding was expected to display elegant nonchalance in every mounted
activity, no matter how simple. Manège horsemanship in all its guises, from the
most basic to the most demanding, thus was an activity that not only permitted the
expression of certain changing beliefs about the meaning of noblesse but actively
demanded their manifestation. By creating such occasions of change, this type of
horsemanship helped those at the top of the noble hierarchy to slowly refashion an
331
identity that no longer was serving their needs into one that was more responsive to
the various challenges their order was facing in the late sixteenth and early
seventeenth centuries. This new set of beliefs about the meaning of noblesse then
gradually spread to those further down the noble ladder, slowly but steadily
reorienting the mentalité of the order as a whole away from an old ideal whose day
had passed and toward a new ideal that ultimately would help the nobility to retain
its role and standing in early modern French society.
332
CONCLUSION
Methodology Revisited
The final chapter of this study closed with an argument that at least some
scholars may find methodologically dubious. Essentially, it said the following:
First, the purely literary texts examined in this study—five manuals of
horsemanship—accurately represent the very high and court nobles’ changing beliefs
about the meaning of noblesse. Second, because that select subgroup of the nobility
was most likely to have attended one of the new académies where instruction in the
type of horsemanship discussed in the manuals was most readily available, these
texts also accurately represent certain changing behaviors of the very high and court
nobles. Third, the beliefs and behaviors of this small and rarefied group gradually
trickled down to and eventually totally reoriented the beliefs (if not the behaviors) of
the nobility as a whole. As a result, fourth, the manuals of horsemanship accurately
represent what beliefs about the meaning of noblesse eventually would become for
the noble order in general. At first glance, this series of arguments does indeed
sound highly suspect. When placed in its larger context, however, it gains
considerable force.
Regarding the first point, it was acknowledged in the Introduction that there
are a number of dangers inherent in claiming that a literary text accurately represents
the beliefs of a group, even a very small group, rather than what the text’s author
would like that group’s beliefs to be. Using the example of François de la Noue’s
1585 treatise on noble education, it was pointed out that this text definitely did not
333
represent the beliefs of the nobility as a whole at that time and that it may not even
have represented the beliefs of the very small number of nobles whose backgrounds
were similar to La Noue’s. The only thing it definitely did reflect was what La Noue
thought his peers’ beliefs should have been on the topic. These statements generally
are true of any isolated text, but they become considerably less so as the ideas
expressed in an individual document begin to appear elsewhere. In the narrow case
in question—that is, when arguing that textual evidence represents the beliefs of a
small and fairly homogeneous group—once there are a number of texts written by or
for its members and expressing a particular idea, then it is far more tenable to claim
that a given set of literary texts represents the beliefs of at least those who belong to
that small group.
The manuals of horsemanship used for this study are a good example of this
“rule” regarding textual evidence as it applies to the very high and court nobility.
When the first edition of the earliest manual was published in the 1590s, it may still
have been a relatively isolated text in terms of how well it reflected the shifting ideas
of the upper echelons of the noble order about the meaning of noblesse. By the time
the revised edition of the final manual appeared in the 1660s, on the other hand, the
ideas it was expressing about noble identity were being articulated by a large number
of texts written by or for the very high and court nobility. As will be shown shortly,
by that time the new beliefs about how noblesse should be defined in fact had spread
sufficiently that authors from various social backgrounds were beginning to refer to
noble status in ways that indicated general societal acceptance of these beliefs: that
334
personal military service no longer was expected of a nobleman but still was
supposed to be part of his ancestral history, that the demonstration of qualities
represented by the concept of vertu still was expected of him but no longer needed to
take place in combat, and that the demonstration of more courtly qualities was a new
but increasingly crucial expectation.
As for the second point, and again as already acknowledged in the
Introduction, it is even more risky to argue that a literary text accurately represents
the behaviors of a group, even a very small group, rather than what the author would
like that group’s behaviors to be. This is where literary sources absolutely must be
supplemented by concrete evidence. Returning to the example of François de la
Noue, the fact that this author was suggesting that nobles should educate their sons in
a particular fashion categorically does not mean that his contemporaries actually
were doing so. There is no evidence that a school such as La Noue described existed
until Pluvinel opened the first académie nearly ten years after La Noue’s treatise was
published; even then, Pluvinel’s curriculum had significant differences from that
suggested by La Noue, and its cost was beyond the reach of all but the wealthiest
noblemen.
By the same token, the fact that the authors of the manuals of horsemanship
seem to be suggesting that manège equitation is something all nobles worthy of the
name should be practicing does not mean that all (or even most) nobles were doing
so. At least initially, this type of horsemanship appears to have been taught
primarily at noble academies, which even at their apogee were not numerous; even if
335
they had been, the vast majority of nobles could not afford to attend. While actual
attendance records are scanty, especially for the period prior to 1670, this study has
argued that there is enough circumstantial evidence to indicate that early
seventeenth-century noblemen who aspired to a career at court—which in and of
itself required substantial financial resources—most likely did attend an académie
and did learn manège equitation. Certainly by the time the last of the manuals used
for this study was published in 1664 and probably long before that, these texts
therefore can be said to accurately represent the behavior of most of the court
nobility, even if they can tell us little or nothing about the behavior of the nobility as
a whole.
As for the third contention—that changes in the belief system of a tiny
minority eventually would lead to changes in the belief system of the majority—here
again it is a case of the accumulation of different types of evidence over time. For
example, changes in beliefs about the roles of military service and martial vertu in
noble self-perception and definition initially were stimulated by objective historical
fact. The history of heavy cavalry shows beyond any doubt that seventeenth-century
French noblemen no longer could expect to serve in the manner so idolized during
the sixteenth century. The heavily armored gendarme charging with lowered lance
in a single line, and then clashing with his opposite number on an almost individual
basis using cold steel, had been replaced by lighter types of mounted troops,
operating in squadron formations and using firearms as their primary weapon. While
this change in military techniques and tactics did not mean that nobles ceased to
336
serve in the cavalry, it did mean that those who did had fewer opportunities to
display their martial vertu, or at least to display it under the conditions that
traditionally had been most meaningful to them.
As already shown, from the late sixteenth century on, this change in objective
historical reality had several interrelated results. Texts written by the traditional
nobility gradually began to speak less of the personal military service of a nobleman
as a defining characteristic of his status. In their writings, nobles began talk more
about vertu as a quality that transcended a strictly military context and to remind
everyone that it was and always had been a noble attribute that could (and should) be
demonstrated in every area of a gentleman’s existence and not just when he was on
the battlefield. By invoking the concept of heritability, they tied both military
service and virtue to noble descent and began to emphasize their ancestry far more
than they had in the past. Noble rhetoric began to focus more on a man’s potential to
provide military service should the occasion arise, the interim maintenance of his
vertu so that that potential could be realized when and if the time came, and the
glorious service of his ancestors and the military “essence” that he and all the male
members of his line had inherited from them.
490
490
Numerous scholars have remarked on the continued importance in the seventeenth-century noble
belief system of the idea that true noblesse had some almost mythic essence militaire, while
simultaneously agreeing that in reality most nobles never had occasion to serve. Instead, these
scholars reference the role of this idea in the collective mentalité of the traditional nobility, using
terms such as self-perception, self-identity, or self-image, and the noble ideal, model, or construct.
For some examples, see Constant, “Absolutisme et modernité,” 198, 200; Corvisier, “Noblesse
militaire,” 336; Duindam Myths of Power, 42, 47, 160; Jouanna, Devoir de révolte, 42; Wood,
Nobility of Bayeux, 71-72.
337
In its own way, this mix of symbiotic shifts in the way traditional French
nobles perceived and articulated their identity also was the result of a change in
objective historical reality. Over the course of the sixteenth century, humanistically
educated non-nobles and anoblis had challenged the concept of noble status based
solely on ancestry and instead suggested that nobility should be based on manifest
(and manifested) personal merits or virtues.
491
Their rhetoric, combined with the
decline of heavy cavalry, stimulated the traditional nobility to clarify its views both
on the respective importance of ancestry, personal military service, and vertu as they
understood it and on the relationship of all these things to one another. Those views
gradually evolved from the expectation that a genuine nobleman would at some point
see actual military service to a belief that a genuine nobleman need only be
descended from someone who had. Beyond that, the only expectation was that he
would maintain his martial vertu, for two primary reasons: first, so that—if and
when it became necessary—he could fulfill his military “function,” and second, so
that he could pass the legacy of noble virtue to his male heirs, thereby perpetuating
not only his line, but also its justification.
491
These ideas were part of the larger Renaissance debate about the meaning of nobility, a complex
topic that falls outside the purview of this study. For examples from the French context of some of
the challenges to the concept of nobility based solely on birth and whence they came, see Devyver,
Sang épuré, 67-68, 76-77, 99, 228-230; Jouanna, “Gros et gras,” 35-38; Jouanna, “Notion d’honneur,”
605-606; Jouanna, Ordre social, 149, 180, 204; Jouanna, “Perception et appréciation,” 12; Jouanna,
“Valeurs guerrières,” 214; Lazard, Brantôme, 17; Mettam, “French Nobility,” 114; Rice, “Humanism
in France,” 119-120; Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 56-61, 117-118. Devyver, Jouanna, and Schalk are
particularly useful for their citations from primary sources, although their interpretations may not
always coincide with those of this study. Jouanna, “Perception et appréciation,” 15-18, also offers a
helpful synopsis of various sixteenth-century modes of ennoblement in France as well as which
groups found them acceptable (or not) and why.
338
These changes in the way the traditional nobility perceived and defined itself
first become apparent in texts written by and for those most directly affected by
them—the nobles themselves. When traces of this shift in thinking begin to appear
in textual evidence written by those who were not members of the traditional
nobility, then the change already has started to spread beyond the beliefs of the
limited group of nobles who initially wrote of it. Once the shift is discernible in a
wide range of different types of texts written by authors from a variety of social
groups, it then becomes reasonable to claim that that shift reflects the thinking of a
majority of the noble order as a whole.
In the case of the example just given, by the later seventeenth century the
textual evidence had followed precisely this pattern. According to several scholars,
beginning in the early seventeenth century the rhetoric challenging nobility of birth
and suggesting that nobility be based on demonstrated personal virtues decreased
significantly and by mid-century had virtually ceased.
492
This substantially eased the
pressure on the way the traditional nobles perceived and defined themselves, because
the implication that nobles were not worthy of their status unless they were fulfilling
their military function and thereby personally demonstrating their military virtues
vanished along with that rhetoric. At the same time that the debate about noblesse
was winding down, we also see a growing number and variety of texts talking about
nobility in ways that indicate that society in general increasingly was accepting both
that inherited noble status was perfectly legitimate and that noble status granted in
492
Greengrass, France in the Age of Henri IV, 235; Mettam, “French Nobility,” 119; Mettam, Power
and Faction, 203; Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 115-116, 219.
339
recognition of extraordinary virtue, military or otherwise, in fact was very rare.
493
From the 1660s on, Louis XIV and especially his recherches de noblesse gave
formal sanction to nobility based solely on birth and effectively quashed any
lingering ideas about nobility based on personal merit.
494
By the end of the
seventeenth century, the textual evidence—and in the case of the recherches, the
archival evidence as well—thus confirms that the nobility in general had reoriented
its thinking about the roles of birth, military service, and virtue in the mix of qualities
that, taken in combination, defined noblesse.
Much the same evidentiary trajectory can be traced for beliefs regarding the
role in noble identity of qualities such as grace, sprezzatura, and a certain type of
cultured knowledge derived from a certain type of educational program. At first,
these qualities appear as required attributes only in texts written by and for those
aspiring to the highest echelons of noblesse—that is, the court nobility.
495
As in the
previous example, however, by the later seventeenth century, the expectation of
higher levels of refinement in the nobly born has spread well beyond this narrow
493
Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 115-119, 129-144, is particularly useful for primary sources that
illustrate this trend over the course of the seventeenth century; see also Greengrass, France in the Age
of Henri IV, 235. For additional secondary scholarship on increasing societal acceptance of birth as
the legitimate basis for nobility through the early eighteenth century, see Dewald, Aristocratic
Experience, 207; Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 212-219; Smith, Culture of Merit, 219-222.
494
Jouanna, Devoir de révolte, 23; Mettam, “French Nobility,” 119-120; Mettam, Power and Faction,
203; Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 213-214; Smith, Culture of Merit, 138-141; Wood, Nobility of
Bayeux, 29-30, 36-42. Smith and Wood offer particularly useful explanations of the recherches.
495
Dewald, Duindam, Motley, and Schalk all have demonstrated that, by the second half of the
seventeenth century, qualities such as grâce, sprezzatura, culture, civilité, politesse, honnêteté, bonnes
mœurs, and bienséance were fundamental requirements for the high and court nobility, and the textual
evidence indubitably supports their arguments. Their work is filled with passages, many of them
referencing primary materials, that could be cited in this regard; see, for example, Dewald,
Aristocratic Experience, 81, 174-175, 202-203; Duindam, Myths of Power, 100-101, 161-162;
Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 13, 69-72, 140-141, 169, 209; Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 174-
175, 180-181, 198-201; see also Major, Renaissance Monarchy, 332-333.
340
subgroup of the nobility and is being articulated by a large number of texts. Even
more importantly, these texts include not just those written by court nobles or even
by lesser nobles and intended for their noble peers, but also texts written by non-
nobles and anoblis about nobility but not necessarily for a noble audience. Once that
has occurred, it is far more justifiable to claim that a given set of literary texts
represents the beliefs of at least the majority of the noble collective.
Here, too, by the late seventeenth century the textual evidence has followed
the pattern. For example, in his essay on the uses of civility during the early modern
period, Jacques Revel traces the development of court etiquette.
496
Much as this
study does, he views this development as being both rooted in and—ultimately—
reflected by courtly literature, beginning with Castiglione’s Book of the Courtier. He
notes that, by the reign of Louis XIV, “the rest of society contemplated the spectacle
offered by the court, a model for all to admire and imitate.” This was particularly
true of “groups outside the court that aspired to emulate various models of
perfection: lower ranking nobles, provincials, and various elites who had linked
their fate to that of the monarchy.” Revel also discusses several examples of early
seventeenth-century courtly literature, which were “addressed not to those who
actually lived in proximity to the sovereign but to those who dreamed of gaining
access,” noting that many of the authors of these treatises were themselves members
496
Jacques Revel, “The Uses of Civility,” in Passions of the Renaissance, ed. Roger Chartier, trans.
Arthur Goldhammer, vol. 3 of A History of Private Life, ed. Philippe Ariès and Georges Duby
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989).
341
of one of these “fringe” groups.
497
Here we already can see the arc of the textual
evidence, moving from literature about grace, sprezzatura, and the like written by
and for court nobles, to literature on similar topics written by lesser nobles, non-
nobles, and anoblis for a mixed—albeit still elite—audience.
As for the spread of civility more broadly—not only to the rest of the noble
collective but to society in general—Revel argues that, at least initially, it was in fact
not the beliefs and behavior of the court nobility that spurred other groups to become
more refined in their everyday comportment. Instead, he views that development as
the result of the influence of manuals of civility, a body of literature parallel to but
separate from the courtly treatises. Revel devotes more than half of his essay to the
influence of these manuals, beginning with Desiderius Erasmus’s 1530 De civilitate
morum puerilium or Manners for Children. According to Revel, this treatise quickly
became the basis for a rash of derivative texts, which in turn became the basis for
widespread instruction in manners at humanist educational institutions throughout
much of Europe. By the end of the sixteenth century, “civility became a central
element in the scholastic curriculum … [and] became part of an enduring educational
model.” By the late seventeenth century, civility books were being mass-produced
and no longer were targeted solely at schoolchildren but instead were “aimed at the
497
Revel, “Uses of Civility,” 190-197; quotes from 195-196. By “courtly literature,” Revel means
quite specifically treatises aimed at those who hoped to make a career at court; in addition to
Castiglione, the “mother text,” he also cites Antoine de Nervèze, Le Guide des courtisans, 1606;
Eustache du Refuge, Traité de la cour, ou Instruction des courtisans, 1616; Nicolas Faret, L’Honneste
Homme, ou L’Art de plaire à la court, 1630.
342
masses in all their diversity.”
498
At this point, at least according to Revel, the push
toward more refined behavior had permeated all levels of French society.
Scholars of early modern French noble education all agree that, by the mid-
seventeenth century if not long before, many if not most male nobles—especially
those whose families could not afford more costly educational options and whose
objectives categorically did not include a career at court—spent time at a collège or
some similar institution whose curriculum was based on the humanist model.
499
If
Revel’s argument about the pervasive presence of civility in the humanist
educational program is accurate, then the children of the petty and provincial nobility
would have been exposed to at least certain aspects of grace and sprezzatura even
before the same trend at court had had much impact. If that be true, then increased
levels of civility among the lesser nobility initially had little or nothing to do with
any “trickle-down effect” based on changes in beliefs and behaviors among the court
nobles.
Although it is true that there is a distinction between the genres of manuals of
civility and courtly literature, Revel’s distinction between the development of civility
498
Revel, “Uses of Civility,” 168-173, 177-181; quotes from 180-181. To underline the ubiquity of
Erasmus’s text by the end of the seventeenth century, Revel cites DAF, s.v. “civilité,” which says:
“On dit prov[erbialement] d’un homme qui manque aux devoirs les plus ordinaires de la civilité, qu’il
n’a pas leu La Civilité puerile.”
499
See, for example, Ariès, “Les Ages des écoliers,” chap. 4 of pt. 2 in L’Enfant et la vie familiale;
Chartier, Compère, and Julia, “Naissance du collège” and “Les Stratégies éducatives au XVII
e
et
XVIII
e
siècles,” chaps. 5 and 6, respectively, in Education en France; Dewald, “Family, Education,
and Selfhood,” chap. 3 in Aristocratic Experience; Motley, “Language and Letters,” chap. 2 in
Becoming a French Aristocrat; Nordhaus, “The Education of the Sixteenth-Century Noblesse: The
Traditional Pattern and Its Defects,” “Arma et Litterae: The Role of Book Learning in the Education
of the Noblesse,” and “The Reform of Education of the Noblesse in Theory and in Fact,” chaps. 3, 4,
and 5, respectively, in “Arma et Litterae.”
343
at and around the court and the development of civility elsewhere in early modern
French society is less convincing. Revel himself raises a question about this
distinction when he discusses a trend toward an increasing restriction of the body in
the civility books, whereby every body part, every gesture, every expression is
subjected to ever stricter standards of control. He juxtaposes the relative freedom
endorsed by Erasmus in 1530 to the extremely demanding rules proposed by later
civility manuals such as Jean-Baptiste de la Salle’s 1703 Règles de la bienséance et
de la civilité chrétienne.
500
Revel describes the high standards of behavior suggested
in Antoine de Courtin’s 1671 Nouveau Traité de la civilité qui se pratique en France
et ailleurs, parmy les honnestes gens in similar language, although in this case he
says that this treatise is no longer a civility manual pure and simple. Revel cites
Courtin’s treatise as exemplifying “the fusion of two hitherto distinct literary
genres”—manuals of civility and courtly literature—and says that “this text marks a
crucial moment in the popularization of the courtly model.”
501
Revel implies that this evolution from Erasmian suggestion to La Sallian
command was true of civility manuals and thus of “the masses in all their diversity”
but not of the courtly literature and thus not of the members of the court. Scholars of
Louis XIV’s Versailles, however, virtually all comment on the increasingly
restrictive and ceremonial nature of court life during the late seventeenth and early
eighteenth centuries. It is unlikely that the experience of the nobles of Louis’s
court—who Revel has acknowledged were seen by the rest of society as “a model for
500
Revel, “Uses of Civility,” 182-190.
501
Revel, “Uses of Civility,” 197-198.
344
all to admire and imitate”—had no impact on the evolution apparent in the manuals
targeted precisely at that rest of society. The increasingly strict standards that Revel
notes in the civility manuals in fact were a further example of the trickle-down effect
in action. Rather than a development totally divorced from changing beliefs and
behaviors among the court nobility, this shift in the textual evidence was a reflection
of a very similar, albeit somewhat earlier and much more extreme, pattern at court
and in the courtly literature.
Whatever its genesis, there is little question that by the late seventeenth
century societal norms had moved toward more refined manners and more controlled
bodies. Numerous scholars besides Revel have documented this change between the
sixteenth and the eighteenth centuries.
502
In this case, the textual evidence that the
noble collective experienced a shift in its beliefs—and, in this particular instance,
apparently in its behaviors as well—is particularly persuasive, coming as it does
from two directions simultaneously. Whether the belief system of the lesser nobles
was influenced by ideas about attributes such as grâce, sprezzatura, and culture that
were generated by the court and disseminated via the trickle-down effect, by ideas
about civility more broadly that were expressed in civility manuals and dispersed via
their spread into the educational system, or by both at once, by the late seventeenth
502
See, for example, Muchembled, Invention de l’homme moderne; Muchembled, Société, cultures et
mentalités; Roger Chartier, “From Text to Manners, A Concept and Its Books: Civilité between
Aristocratic Distinction and Popular Appropriation,” in The Cultural Uses of Print in Early Modern
France, trans. Lydia G. Cochrane (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1987); Norbert Elias,
The History of Manners, vol. 1 of The Civilizing Process, trans. Edmund Jephcott (New York: Urizen
Books, 1978); Georges Vigarello, Le Corps redressé: Histoire d’un pouvoir pedagogique (Paris:
Jean-Pierre Delarge, 1978); Georges Vigarello, Le Propre et le sale: L’Hygiène du corps depuis le
Moyen Age (Paris: Seuil, 1985). For sources on changing attitudes toward the body specifically
among the nobility, see n. 505, below.
345
century the textual evidence indicates that the nobility as a whole had accepted the
addition of qualities such as grace, sprezzatura, education, and culture to the mix of
attributes comprising the new noble ideal.
The manuals of horsemanship again serve as a good example of this “rule”
for using purely literary sources as a means of assessing noble culture, by showing
how changes in the textual evidence can, over time and when complemented by
changes in more concrete types of evidence, reflect actual changes in the belief
system of the noble order as a whole. For example, out of the five authors of the
treatises used for this study, the only one who devotes much space to the importance
of noble birth is La Broue, whose manual was the earliest of the five.
503
At the time
that he was writing—in the 1590s for his first edition, and in the first decade of the
seventeenth century for his second—the debate about noblesse was still a matter of
some concern for traditional nobles. When Pluvinel began recording his views
around 1615, much of that concern already had been allayed, as the concept that
noble status was based solely on birth became an increasingly accepted given. By
503
In several passages, La Broue says quite explicitly that noble birth and the innate qualities and
virtuous upbringing that automatically accompany it are prerequisites or requirements for equestrian
success. In the following example, he also argues the flip side of that coin, i.e., that those who lack
noble birth and all that naturally accompanies it will never be able to achieve results of any value
whatsoever: “Il n’advient iamais que la perfection d’un tel sçavoir se communique à certains esprits
foibles & grossiers, qui le profanent tous les iours…. Cela nous est assez confirmé par les plus
excellens Cavalerices qui ont esté en toute l’Italie, dont la pluspart, sont yssus de nobles & illustres
maisons, & tous ont esté tres-bien & honorablement eslevez & instruits en leur ieunesse. Aussi ont-ils
monstré, par leurs belles & honnestes actions la difference, de leur vertueuse nourriture & belles
qualitez, à la basse & commune façon de faire d’une infinité d’autres hommes mal creez, estourdis &
presomptueux, qui comme aveuglez en leur erreur, & pour avoir dressé à l’avanture quelque cheval
facile parmy beaucoup d’autres, qu’ils auront gastez, osent bien aucunes fois esgaler quelque grosse
& vieille pratique mal fondee, qu’ils ont acquise par ie ne sçay quelle routine, à la science &
reputation d’une si docte & vertueuse troupe. Mais quoyqu’ils en pensent, il est certain, qu’il n’y a
que les plus beaux esprits, qui soient propres pour les plus beaux exercices….” La Broue, Cavalerice
françois, 1:3-4; see also 2:6-7, 2:174, for similar remarks.
346
the time the texts of Menou and Delcampe were published in the 1650’s and 1660s,
we are hearing more about the nobility of the horse than the nobility of the rider:
rather than saying that the qualities that come with noble ancestry are a prerequisite
to mounted success, Menou and Delcampe seem to be saying that horses and
horsemanship themselves can confer—or at least enhance—those qualities.
504
Noble
descent as the basis for noble status quite literally goes without saying.
As for vertu, it already has been shown that all of the manuals speak at
considerable length of the qualities comprising this attribute of nobility, and they do
so consistently over the roughly seventy years spanned by the five texts. That noble
beliefs regarding the role of virtue—and, by extension, of military service—
gradually were changing during this period in this case is indicated more by what is
not said than by what is. For example, rather than saying or even implying that the
qualities of vertu are necessities for warfare, the authors of the manuals tout those
qualities almost exclusively as requirements for good horsemanship. Manège
equitation and mounted games are not being promoted as things a nobleman needs to
know how to do in order to be successful in combat; instead, they are presented as
things a nobleman should know how to do in order to be a more successful
nobleman. In the manuals as in other types of texts, virtue indubitably remains an
important attribute of the nobleman, but its importance now is tied to factors other
than—or at least supplemental to—its relevance for warfare.
504
Menou, preface, Pratique du cavalier; Delcampe, “De l’Excellence de l’art de monter à cheval,” 1-
2, 5-7, 19-20, in L’Art de monter à cheval. For additional details on these passages (including the full
citation and translation of the third Delcampe quote), see n. 130, above, and related text.
347
While indications of changing attitudes toward the roles of military service
and virtue in the noble construct thus fall into the category of what might be termed
negative evidence, indications of changing attitudes toward the qualities of grace and
sprezzatura are much more concrete. The importance of these new attributes already
is emphasized quite heavily in the earliest of these treatises: La Broue and Pluvinel
constantly underline the need for graceful and effortless performance. La Noue,
Menou, and Delcampe are just as insistent, if not more so, in their expectation that
anyone hoping to be considered a genuine gentilhomme must be naturally and
spontaneously graceful and sprezzata while mounted. The manuals of horsemanship
thus follow precisely the same evidentiary arc as other sorts of textual evidence
concerning shifting ideas about the meaning of noblesse. It is through following this
arc that we can see how the beliefs and behaviors of those at the top of the noble
hierarchy gradually trickled down to and helped to reshape—at least in their broad
outlines—the beliefs (if not the behaviors) of the noble order more broadly.
Fourth and finally, even if we consider only texts written by and for the very
high and court nobility, it is clear that the courtier of François I’s Louvre was very
different from the courtier of Louis XIV’s Versailles. If we look at the cumulative
evidence over the long term and from a much wider variety of sources, both literary
and not, it also is clear that the noble ideal of the early sixteenth century was very
different from the noble ideal of the late seventeenth century. By the latter period,
the new belief system about what constituted the perfect nobleman clearly had
spread to the thinking of social groups well beyond the nobility. Since it is hard to
348
imagine how society in general could be aware of such ideas while the lower
echelons of the traditional nobility remained oblivious, it therefore can be asserted
that the enormous changes in beliefs and behaviors at the top of the noble hierarchy
had a considerable impact on the beliefs (if not the behaviors) of at least a substantial
majority of traditional nobles. Given that the manuals of horsemanship used for this
study follow exactly the same pattern as other types of contemporary textual
evidence, claiming that these treatises can provide accurate information about the
beliefs—or at least the future beliefs—of the nobility as a whole is far more
defensible than it might initially have appeared.
Thesis and Arguments Revisited
As the preceding chapters have shown, manuals of horsemanship not only
reveal the ways in which the traditional early modern French nobility viewed and
talked about manège equitation and the airs above the ground, they also reveal the
personal qualities that the nobles believed a rider needed in order to be both skilled at
and admired while performing these mounted activities. Some of these qualities
were old and familiar friends, carried over from the nobility’s longstanding belief
system about the meaning of noblesse, while others reflected qualities that had been
introduced into that belief system over the course of the sixteenth century, many of
them offshoots of ideas rooted in Renaissance Italian court culture. What is
particularly interesting here is that these texts reveal that early seventeenth-century
French nobles apparently believed that many of the attributes that they considered
quintessentially “noble” also were the attributes that they considered essential to
349
good horsemanship. Because of these parallels, the manuals can tell us much about
both continuities and changes in noble self-perception and definition in the late
sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries.
As another result of these parallels, the manuals also reveal the role played by
horsemanship itself in shifting notions about noble identity during this period.
Precisely because riding well required the same personal qualities that simply being
noble did, mounted activities leant themselves—as few others could—not only to the
development of those qualities, but also to their display in front of an admiring
audience of the noble rider’s peers. The back of a fiery sauteur provided an ideal
platform from which to simultaneously flaunt many of the qualities he would need in
combat and many of those he would need at court. Because horsemanship offered
this double-sided opportunity, it was in and of itself a vehicle for both continuities
and changes in noble self-perception and definition.
In terms of continuities, manège equitation in all its guises, including both the
mounted games related to it and the airs relevés, temporarily allowed the nobility to
maintain the illusion that they still were developing their military skills and martial
characteristics during a period in which both of these formerly central characteristics
of noble identity were losing their relevance. As it became increasingly less likely
that a nobleman personally would serve as a heavy cavalryman, military action
lingered as an element defining nobility primarily as part of the noble ideal:
something for which all nobles were supposed to be prepared and something to
which all nobles were supposed to aspire, but in reality something that most nobles
350
had no realistic hope of achieving. Virtue, on the other hand, remained a crucial
element of noble self-perception and definition, at least during the early stages of the
shift from the nobility’s old warrior-knight identity to its new courtier-aristocrat one.
Until the nobles had had an opportunity to adjust to and fully incorporate new
attributes such as grace, sprezzatura, and education or “culture,” the retention of
virtue provided a sort of transitional “comfort zone” for them. Vertu still consisted
of the same set of personal characteristics that it always had, but these traits
henceforth would manifest themselves most gloriously, not by participation in a
certain type of mounted military performance, but instead by participation in certain
types of mounted nonmilitary performances. Some of these were simply reworked
variations on preexisting themes, while some of them were entirely new, but all of
them provided a showcase for a nobleman’s vertu. As a result, even if a nobleman
rarely could develop and demonstrate his military prowess and vertu while riding
into battle or riding in a tournament, at least he still could do so while riding.
Because of the role that mounted activities played in temporarily sustaining
the continuity of martial vertu (as well as at least the illusion of the continuity of
military service), the new forms of horsemanship were especially important during
the earliest and most unsettling stages of the nobility’s transition from an obsolete
identity to a more relevant and effective one. As has been shown, however, over the
course of the seventeenth century both military skills and martial virtue slowly were
pushed aside by a combination of noble ancestry and new, more courtly attributes.
Eventually, military service as a requirement for noblesse receded in importance to
351
such an extent that those aspects of vertu that traditionally had been associated
specifically with the nobility’s military function gradually began to recede as well.
Once virtue had been dissociated completely from its original context, its usefulness
as an element defining nobility inevitably declined. The term vertu slowly slipped
out of use and was supplanted by various new ones such as honnêteté, civilité, and
politesse. These terms covered a range of personal characteristics, which certainly
included the nonmilitary aspects of traditional noble vertu that had been held over
from the sixteenth century but which also included all the new, more courtly traits
now considered essential to genuine noblesse. These qualities joined noble ancestry
to help create an essentially new definition of nobility. After centuries of occupying
center stage, and after decades of playing at least supporting roles, both military
service and martial vertu eventually retired almost entirely from the theater of noble
definition.
Horsemanship, on the other hand, remained an important component of noble
identity because it was exceptionally useful for the display of many of the new
attributes of nobility. Manège equitation, the airs above the ground, and mounted
games all provided the nobility with an excellent means to develop grace and
sprezzatura; as a result of their intimate relationship to the academies, these mounted
activities also participated in the new attribute of education and the unique type of
culture that resulted from it. The new form of horsemanship was particularly useful
in developing that aspect of a nobleman’s supposedly “natural” grace that had to do
with the turn toward internal discipline: the self-restraint of body and gesture, the
352
self-policing of passion and emotion, that were to become one of the hallmarks of
politesse, civilité, and honnêteté.
505
As this study’s last two chapters in particular
have shown, the quality of the rider’s performance was judged to a great extent on
how well he could communicate with his horse without having to resort to
extravagant gestures and impassioned cries. The more restrained and controlled he
could be, in both body and affect, the more worthy he would be of the esteem of his
peers. In all of these ways, manège equitation in all of its forms—the manèges bas,
the airs relevés, and the mounted games—contributed to changing ideas about the
meaning of noblesse.
Horsemanship in Decline … or Not?
By the late seventeenth century, the meaning of nobility no longer relied on
obsolete attributes such as fully armored heavy cavalry service and the type of vertu
associated specifically with it, and qualities such as grâce, sprezzatura, culture,
civilité, politesse, honnêteté, bonnes mœurs, and bienséance had become the primary
attributes associated with noblesse. Once it no longer was necessary for the nobility
to maintain its mythic links to military skills and martial virtues through the medium
of horsemanship, it is tempting to assume that mounted ability would become less
505
On the increasing concern during the seventeenth century, especially among the court nobility,
with self-imposed control of demeanor and movement as a new marque de noblesse, on the
relationship of that concern to noble beliefs regarding “natural” grace in the nobly born, and on the
relationship of those beliefs to noble education, see Arditi, Genealogy of Manners, 77; Duindam,
Myths of Power, 175; Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 7-8, 10, 13, 123-124, 139-141, 211;
Muchembled, Société, cultures et mentalités, 164; Georges Vigarello, “The Upward Training of the
Body from the Age of Chivalry to Courtly Civility,” in Fragments for a History of the Human Body,
pt. 2, ed. Michel Feher, Ramona Naddaf, and Nadia Tazi (New York: Zone, 1989). On similar
changes in attitudes toward the body among early modern French elite groups more generally, see
Muchembled, “L’Ordre des corps,” chap. 4 in L’Invention de l’homme moderne.
353
crucial in the mix of qualities comprising noble identity and eventually would be
dropped as a necessary “mark” of a true gentleman.
The temptation to see a decrease in the importance of mounted activities is
further heightened by the fact that the académies, which had been the primary
venues at which the new forms of horsemanship could be learned, began to decline
in both number and popularity toward the end of the seventeenth century. Virtually
all of the scholars who have examined the French académies note that they reached
their apogee, at least in Paris, around 1680, at which point there were seven or eight
different establishments in the city.
506
By 1690, however, there were only four
Parisian academies left, all struggling to make ends meet. On 1 January 1691, by
order of the grand écuyer, they were consolidated into two, and from that point until
the French Revolution, their number fluctuated between one and three.
507
The
provincial schools followed a similar trajectory. From a high of eighteen to twenty
academies operating simultaneously in various provincial cities in the late
seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, their numbers dropped steadily.
506
Specifically on the number of Parisian academies at their high point, see Dumolin, “Académies
parisiennes,” pt. 1, 425, 427, and pt. 2, 494; Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 127. On their
apogee in the capital city more generally, see also Hoche, “Pluvinel et les académies,” 910, 913-914.
507
Specifically on the consolidation of the Parisian academies in 1691, see Babeau, Les Officiers, 33;
Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” pt. 1, 424, and pt. 2, 485, 494. On their decline more generally
over the course of the late seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, see Babeau, Les Officiers, 33-34;
Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” pt. 1, 425, 427, and pt. 2, 486-487; Hoche, “Pluvinel et les
académies,” 916; La Roche, “Académies militaires,” 411; Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat,
164.
354
According to Maurice Dumolin, by 1733, only thirteen remained; by 1771, only
five.
508
Mark Motley states quite explicitly that part of the reason the academies
experienced this decline in numbers and popularity was “the decline in social
importance of the academy’s principal subject of study, horsemanship,” which in
turn, he maintains, led to a decline in the centrality of mounted instruction in the
curriculum. He continues:
After the last great carousel to honor the dauphin in 1685, this form of
spectacle declined as an element of court festival, taking on the more limited
form of a military parade that it still enjoys today. As a consequence, during
the eighteenth century riding lessons occupied only three mornings a week,
while running at the ring almost vanished from the academy’s curriculum.
509
Many other sources, however, both primary and secondary, indicate that
horsemanship continued to be a central component of noble education right up to the
French Revolution. Motley bases his statements regarding the decrease in the
number of riding lessons and the decline of running at the ring on one archival
document apiece, and he bases his assumption about the decline of horsemanship
more generally on a passage from François Robichon de la Guérinière’s 1733
manual of horsemanship, L’Ecole de cavalerie.
510
These sources can be interpreted
differently than Motley has done.
508
Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” pt. 1, 423; see also La Roche, “Académies militaires,” 418.
On the heyday of the provincial academies, see Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” pt. 1, 423; La
Roche, “Académies militaires,” 414, 418; Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 127; Schalk, Valor
to Pedigree, 191 n. 50.
509
Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 166.
510
Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 166 n. 94. For the riding lessons, he cites A.N. O
1
915,
fol. 179; for running at the ring, A.N. O
1
915, fol. 17. For La Guérinière, see next note. Motley offers
no source for his statement regarding the decline of the carrousel.
355
For example, in the passage from L’Ecole de cavalerie that Motley cites, La
Guérinière in fact appears to be lamenting, not the decline of horsemanship in
general, but that of the airs relevés in particular:
To our shame, it must be admitted: the love of this exercise’s true beauty has
decreased considerably these days; one is satisfied at present with an overly
lax execution, whereas in the past one strove for the beautiful airs, which
were the ornament of our manèges, and the glory of reviews, ceremonies, and
parades.
511
La Guérinière goes on to say that this neglect of les beaux airs certainly is not due to
lack of merit or interest on the part of those in charge of noble educational
establishments, for the ability of these écuyers is evidenced by the public’s ongoing
support of their efforts.
512
All of this taken together indicates that horsemanship in
the broader sense categorically was not in a state of decline at the time La Guérinière
was writing, even if the more elaborate airs relevés were less popular than they had
been in the previous century.
513
As for the purported decline of running at the ring, Lucien Clare’s statistical
analysis of the popularity of this game in France from the mid-sixteenth century to
the late eighteenth century indicates that, although the frequency with which the
511
“Il faut l’avouer à notre honte: l’amour du vrai beau de cet exercice s’est bien ralenti de nos jours;
on se contente presentement d’une exécution un peu trop négligée, au lieu qu’autrefois on recherchoit
les beaux airs, qui faisoient l’ornement de nos manèges, & le brillant des revües, des pompes & des
parades.” François Robichon de la Guérinière, unpaginated preface, L’Ecole de cavalerie, contenant
la connoissance, l’instruction, et la conservation du cheval (Paris: Jacques Collombat, 1733).
512
“Il ne faut point imputer cette négligence, ni au manque de mérite, ni au peu d’atention de ceux qui
sont à la tête des établissemens instituez pour l’instruction de la Noblesse; la justice que le Public leur
rend est un sur garant de leur capacité.” La Guérinière, preface, Ecole de cavalerie.
513
The decreasing popularity of the airs above the ground noted by La Guérinière was but the
beginning of a much broader trend. This decline has continued ever since for several reasons, the
most obvious being that the high airs are extremely difficult, they require a very special type of horse,
and they have no practical application—not even competitive—beyond pure display.
356
game was performed in contexts formal enough to have left written records did
decline substantially from the 1630s on, it certainly did not disappear; perhaps just as
importantly, from the 1660s on, a slightly different mounted game, the course des
têtes or running at the heads, competed with running at the ring on a virtually equal
basis.
514
That being the case, even if it were true that “running at the ring almost
vanished from the academy’s curriculum,” this does not mean that mounted games
more broadly did so as well. As will be shown shortly, this also does not mean that
running at the ring vanished from noble education: it simply moved from the
academy to the court.
Motley’s claim that the number of riding lessons was decreased to three days
per week is particularly problematic. First, a short passage in a single archival
document usually is not enough from which to make such a generalization; second
and more importantly, virtually all the other scholars who have looked at noble
académies in any depth maintain that the curriculum remained remarkably consistent
over time. Motley himself cites the 1691 règlement in which the grand écuyer
stipulated that students at the Parisian academies were to spend all morning, every
morning, on “exercices de manège” and “exercices de bague.” Albert Babeau tells
us that, “in the academy of M. de Jouan … in 1762, the entire morning was spent on
horseback riding and running at the heads.” Dumolin cites both the 1691 rule and
Jouan’s program in 1760, as well as the programs of two other Parisian academies,
one from 1692 and the other from just prior to 1789; he says that all of them were
514
Clare, Quintaine, course de bague, jeu des têtes, 94-96.
357
comparable to the curriculum at Pluvinel’s academy in the early seventeenth century,
where—again—all morning, every morning, was devoted to mounted activities.
515
Somewhat ironically, it is Motley who offers an explanation that could
account simultaneously for the decline of the académies and for the continued
importance of manège equitation and mounted games among the court nobility. He
says that, “by the end of the seventeenth century …, court institutions played an
increasing role in the education of adolescent nobles….” “Perhaps the most
important of these [were] … the schools for pages, which had been expanded and
improved by Louis XIV….” “Since by the height of Louis’s reign the number of
pages in the principal royal schools outnumbered the total enrollments of all the
Parisian riding academies, it is tempting to see Louis’s expansion and amelioration
of the royal schools as one of the principal reasons for the academies’ decline.”
516
This supposition is particularly tempting because the curriculum at the court schools
for pages was virtually identical to that at the noble académies. Motley cites archival
515
Babeau, Les Officiers, 34-35; Dumolin, “Académies parisiennes,” pt. 2, 485-486 (1691 règlement),
and pt. 3, 568 (various Parisian academies); Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 142. For the
curriculum at Pluvinel’s academy, see pp. 132-140, above.
516
Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 124, 164-165, 179, respectively. On the expansion of the
court schools for pages as a probable reason for the decline of the académies, see also Duindam,
Myths of Power, 175; Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 168-170; Schalk, “Pluvinel,” 174.
Several scholars also note that, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, noble students
attending more traditional boarding schools (collèges) were increasingly able to access extracurricular
instruction in many of the subjects offered at the academies and the schools for pages that were not
part of the normal collège curriculum, e.g., riding, fencing, dancing, music, drawing, writing,
mathematics, modern languages, history, geography; see Ariès, L’Enfant et la vie familiale, 228;
Major, Renaissance Monarchy, 332; Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat, 118 -119, 165. As Ariès
points out, the existence of these alternatives indicates how important attendance at an académie or
similar institution had become for “young men of good family” during the seventeenth century. A
gentilhomme who could not afford to send his son to an academy or one of the court schools was
obligated to piece together a comparable education at a variety of establishments offering the
necessary pieces of the noble educational puzzle.
358
sources indicating that the pages in the grande écurie in 1667 were taught “riding,
dancing, vaulting, fencing and military drills, mathematics, writing, and drawing,”
and that in 1722 “the school’s curriculum was essentially the same …, except for the
addition of occasional lessons in history and geography.”
517
Babeau, Edouard de
Barthélemy, and Arthur Christian all agree both that Louis XIV reorganized and
revitalized the page system and that the curriculum at the two écuries (grande and
petite) consisted of the topics just given—that is, of precisely the same mix of
subjects offered at an academy.
518
Babeau emphasizes that, of all the subjects,
“equitation was still the most important.”
519
When all of the above is taken into consideration, Motley’s assumption that
the académies declined from the late seventeenth century on because manège
equitation and the mounted games related to it had begun to lose their “social
importance” in the culture of the high and court nobility is unlikely. There is an
alternative argument, which allows simultaneously for horsemanship to retain its
central role in noble education and for the parameters of what was “socially
important” to the nobility to change as time passed. As this study has stated
517
Bibliothèque Nationale Clairambault 829, fols. 66
r
-79
r
(for 1667), and the règlement for pages of 1
January 1722, A.N. O
1
970, fol. 105, articles 2 and 8, cited by Motley, Becoming a French Aristocrat,
178-179.
518
Babeau, Les Officiers, 43; Barthélemy, Grands Ecuyers, 89, 124; Christian, Art équestre à Paris,
47. Ariès, L’Enfant et la vie familiale, 226, concurs that the program of instruction for pages at the
royal écuries was identical to that at contemporary academies.
519
“L’équitation, nous la retrouvons toujours au premier rang.” Babeau, Les Officiers, 43. In the
same passage, Babeau also makes reference to the habits of the prince de Lambesc when he was
grand écuyer, saying the he was “à cheval, même en hiver, à cinq heures du matin, et il fallait bien
que les pages profitassent des leçons qu’il leur donnait.” According to Barthélemy, Grands Ecuyers,
139, Charles-Eugène de Lorraine, prince de Lambesc, held the post of grand écuyer from 1761 to
1789. If Babeau’s anecdote is true, this certainly suggests that horsemanship remained centrally
important to noble education right up to the Revolution.
359
repeatedly, horsemanship was unusual in that it permitted nobles to display both
qualities associated with noblesse that were declining in importance and qualities
that were becoming increasingly crucial as time passed. Once those in the declining
category had been relegated to the margins of noble self-perception and definition,
mounted activities no longer were coveted for their potential to display martial vertu;
their potential to display many of the qualities that had social importance to a late
seventeenth- or eighteenth-century nobleman, on the other hand, continued unabated.
As a result, manège equitation and mounted games continued to be the central
components of noble educational programs, whether at an académie or at one of the
court schools, and skilled and graceful horsemanship continued to be an important
marque de noblesse among the very high and court nobility who had matriculated at
one of those institutions.
Additional Research Questions
The validity of the argument proposed above is, unfortunately, not something
that this particular study can attempt to demonstrate: as intriguing as it might be to
test its strengths and weaknesses, that will have to await another day. There are, in
fact, a number of topics related to the role of horses and horsemanship in early
modern French noble culture that bear further examination but could not be
addressed at this time. For example, it could be interesting to explore the
ramifications of falling off, or how honor and reputation could be lost or gained
through mounted activities. Examining how the transition from the medieval
knight’s mastery of horse and weaponry to the early modern courtier’s mastery of
360
horse alone interfaced with shifting notions about masculinity could be instructive.
A fascinating comparative study could be made between the rider who must mold
and monitor the nature, body, and impulses of his horse and the “civilized” nobleman
who must mold and monitor his own nature, body, and impulses.
There are even methodological issues that could be reconsidered in the light
of the nobility’s relationship with horses. For example, in the context of the debate
about the effect that new ideas might or might not have had on the beliefs and
behaviors of the noble collective, it could be interesting to investigate what it would
mean if supposedly “new” ideas were in fact not very new but instead were merely
modifications on familiar existing themes—that is, if what looks like a significant
change to modern eyes in fact represented only a minor rearrangement in the eyes of
contemporaries. What if the nobility viewed manège equitation and the airs above
the ground, not as a sharp break with previous equestrian traditions, but rather as a
small adjustment of existing mounted practice? The presumed distance between new
ideas and shifts in collective beliefs and behaviors might then narrow considerably,
which could shed new light on how the nobles experienced continuity and change,
not only in the narrow context of horsemanship but in other areas of their existence
as well.
Probably the most interesting issues that bear further exploration are those
having to do with the relationship between horse and rider. For example, the
difference between the relationship of nobles with their mounts and relationships at
which other scholars have looked—of nobles with the king, of nobles with other
361
nobles, of nobles with themselves—is that the relationship between a nobleman and
his horse is that between a human and a non-human “other.” What kind of intellect
did it take to train an animal that simultaneously had the capacity to feel and even
think at some level yet was still an animal and thus on a very different plane of
emotion and reason from its rider? How did the noble-equine relationship compare
with other noble-animal relationships? How did the rider’s experience of the
“otherness” of his (non-human) horse compare to contemporary experiences of
“otherness” as they related to, say, (human) nationality, race, or religion?
520
Perhaps the most tantalizing topic of all concerns the analogy between the
relational pairings horse / rider and subject / ruler, especially in the context of early
modern French absolutism. As discussed in Chapter Six, manuals of horsemanship
from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries show a distinct shift in the way they
represent the relationship between horse and rider. In sixteenth-century texts, the
horse is portrayed as an irrational force of nature that must be dominated by its rider;
in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century texts, the horse is presented as a more
sentient entity that has the capacity to participate in the training process. These
manuals instruct the rider not to dominate and suppress but to control and direct his
mount’s vigor, pride, courage, energy, fire, spirit, and sensitivity. The rider retains
the upper hand, and getting the horse to do what he wants remains the objective, but
520
Some initial work on horses, horsemanship, and “otherness” in early modern England has been
done; see Raber, “Reasonable Creatures,” and the following chapters in Raber and Tucker, Culture of
the Horse: Raber, “A Horse of a Different Color”; Donna Landry, “Learning to Ride in Early Modern
Britain, or The Making of the English Hunting Seat”; Richard Nash, “‘Honest English Breed’: The
Thoroughbred as Cultural Metaphor.”
362
the manuals recommend that he exercise his command through tactful management
rather than strident demand. If the rider can negotiate with his mount’s fears,
confusions, doubts, and moods, rather than simply using brute force to suppress and
subjugate them, he will create less resentment and resistance and more cooperation
and compliance between himself and his horse. Wherever possible, the rider
therefore should use gentle persuasion rather than harsh punishment; whenever
possible, the horse should be allowed to think that it is part of a negotiating process
between equals rather than a defenseless inferior who must acquiesce to the orders of
a dictatorial superior.
The relationship between horse and rider that is articulated in seventeenth-
century manuals of horsemanship has many suggestive parallels to the relationship
that was developing between French nobles and their king during the same period.
Recent scholarship on absolutism has shown that the king’s power was far from
absolute and that the monarch was so successful in commanding his nobility
precisely because he employed tactics very similar to those that the manuals
recommend that the rider employ in order to be successful in commanding his horse.
What might we learn by looking more closely at these analogies?
521
Closing Remarks
As discussed in the Introduction, much of the noble rhetoric of the late
sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries would lead us to believe that the traditional
521
For some suggestive initial work on the parallels between the relationship of a rider with his horse
and that of a ruler with his subjects, see the sources in n. 429, above. Van Orden is particularly useful
for the French case.
363
French nobility’s response to the various challenges it was facing during that period
was not to adapt but instead to insist on a return to the old way of doing things,
totally ignoring the fact that circumstances had long since rendered that option
obsolete. This is precisely the type of literary evidence that led earlier historians of
the French nobility to conclude that the nobles not only were in a state of crisis and
decline but also that they were in that state because they were too short-sighted and
stubborn to recognize the need to adjust to all the changes going on around them. As
has been demonstrated by more recent scholarship, that simply was not the case.
The research of William Beik, Donna Bohanan, J. Russell Major, and others
has examined the lived experiences of the French nobility through the end of the
seventeenth century. These scholars have drawn primarily on archival sources to
demonstrate that nobles of this period were far from being in crisis or decline and in
fact were able to weather the myriad military, political, social, and cultural changes
going on around them quite well.
522
Although neither this study nor the research of
the scholars just named extends into the eighteenth century, the work of others
indicates that similar statements could be made about the nobility’s continued
survival and stability throughout the remainder of the ancien régime.
Ellery Schalk, for example, says that his research “suggests an adaptation and
a transformation by the nobility in response to changing circumstances …, rather
522
For Major’s conclusions regarding the French nobility in the final decades of the seventeenth
century, see Renaissance Monarchy, 310-321. Beik, Absolutism and Society, and Bohanan, Nobility
in Aix, both are arranged thematically rather than chronologically and therefore do not lend
themselves to this sort of summary citation for a specific period within the century.
364
than a decline.” Referring initially to scholars of the sixteenth- and seventeenth-
century nobility, he continues:
Continuity and adaptation characterize the findings of [James B.] Wood,
[Jean-Marie] Constant, and to some extent [Pierre] Labatut, and these in turn
suggest continued noble health through the eighteenth century when merged
with the conclusions of, for instance, Robert Forster, Jean Meyer, and Guy
Chaussinand-Nogaret.
523
James B. Wood says much the same thing: “Much recent research has stressed the
continued power and prosperity of the nobility in the period immediately following
its supposed demise” during the sixteenth century. Evoking several of the same
names cited by Schalk, he continues:
Pierre Labatut, for example, emphasized the great wealth and prestige of the
upper nobility of France in the seventeenth century. Jean Meyer, Mohamed
el Kordi, and Robert Forster outlined the economic, social, and political
dominance by the nobility in the eighteenth century of, respectively, Brittany,
the Norman Bessin, and the diocese of Toulouse…. The fact that historians
of the eighteenth century have discovered few effects of a previous, and no
evidence of a continuing decline of the nobility raises the possibility that such
a decline never took place.
524
523
Schalk, Valor to Pedigree, 209-210 and nn. 16-21. The references are to Wood, Nobility of
Bayeux; Jean-Marie Constant, “Nobles et paysans en Beauce aux XVI
e
et XVII
e
siècles” (thèse d’état,
Université de Paris IV, 1978); Jean-Pierre Labatut, Les Ducs et pairs de France au XVII
e
siècle: Etude
sociale (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1972); Jean Meyer, La Noblesse bretonne au XVIII
e
siècle, 2 vols. (Paris: S.E.V.P.E.N., 1966); Jean Meyer, “La Noblesse française au XVIII
e
siècle:
Aperçu des problèmes,” Acta Polonia Historica 36 (1977): 7-45; Robert Forster, The Nobility of
Toulouse in the Eighteenth Century: A Social and Economic Study (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1960); Robert Forster, The House of Saulx-Tavannes: Versailles and Burgundy,
1700-1830 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1971); Guy Chaussinand-Nogaret, La
Noblesse au XVIII
e
siècle: De la Féodalité aux Lumières (Paris: Hachette, 1976). Schalk also cites
William A. Weary, “The House of La Trémoille, Fifteenth through Eighteenth Centuries: Change and
Adaptation in a French Noble Family,” Journal of Modern History 49 (1977): on-demand supplement.
524
Wood, Nobility of Bayeux, 9 and nn. 14-16. Wood echoes Schalk’s citations of Labatut, Ducs et
pairs, Meyer, Noblesse bretonne, and Forster, Nobility of Toulouse, and he adds Mohamed el Kordi,
Bayeux aux XVII
e
et XVIII
e
siècles: Contribution à l’histoire urbaine de la France (Paris: Mouton,
1970). More recent titles on the eighteenth-century French nobility include François Bluche, La
Noblesse française au XVIII
e
siècle (Paris: Hachette, 1995); Laurent Bourquin, La Noblesse dans la
France moderne, XVI
e
-XVIII
e
siècles (Paris: Belin, 2002); Monique Cubells, La Noblesse provençale:
Du Milieu du XVII
e
siècle à la Révolution (Aix-en-Provence: Publications de l’Université de
Provence, 2002); Harold A. Ellis, Boulainvilliers and the French Monarchy: Aristocratic Politics in
365
In light of this new knowledge, scholars have begun to reassess some of the
purely literary source material, to see if any traces of the nobility’s capacity to
change can be found there. Jonathan Dewald, Roger Mettam, Mark Motley, Jay
Smith, and other cultural historians have used primarily textual evidence to
demonstrate that the traditional early modern French nobility gradually refashioned
its self-perception and definition over the course of the seventeenth century. Their
work has added further nuance to that of the archivally based studies, by showing
that this shift in the way that the traditional French nobles perceived and defined
themselves played a large role in their ability to adapt and thus not just to survive but
to flourish.
Like the textual evidence used by other cultural historians, the manuals of
horsemanship used for this study offer scholars yet another opportunity to assess a
body of literary source materials for signs of the nobility’s ability to adapt. These
treatises allow us to access certain aspects of the nobility’s beliefs about its own
identity during a moment of unconscious transition, and they reveal a group that was
responding and adjusting to its environment. The fact that this response initially
took place primarily in the realm of the nobility’s belief system does not negate the
fact that this shift in beliefs made it possible for the nobles to change psychologically
Early Eighteenth-Century France (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1988); Mathieu Marraud, La
Noblesse de Paris au XVIII
e
siècle (Paris: Seuil, 2000); Jean Meyer, La Noblesse française à l’époque
moderne (XVI
e
-XVIII
e
siècles), 2
nd
ed. (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1996); Jay M. Smith,
Nobility Reimagined: The Patriotic Nation in Eighteenth-Century France (Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press, 2005); Jay M. Smith, ed., The French Nobility in the Eighteenth Century:
Reassessments and New Approaches (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2006);
Julian Swann, “French Nobility, 1715-1789,” in Western Europe, vol. 1 of The European Nobilities in
the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, ed. H. M. Scott (New York: Longman, 1995).
366
in ways that in turn allowed them to adapt more effectively to the reality of their
changing circumstances. What the manuals of horsemanship reveal about the
traditional French nobility thus simultaneously undermines the “crisis and decline”
conclusions of older textually based scholarship, supports the “adaptation and
survival” findings of recent archival research, and reaffirms the premise underlying
many recent cultural studies: that literary sources—when used thoughtfully and in
combination with other types of evidence—can be a viable means of accessing at
least some aspects of noble realities.
This study has added to this last body of scholarship by arguing that horses
and horsemanship—especially manège equitation and the airs above the ground—
helped to facilitate the nobility’s transition from an obsolete medieval warrior-knight
identity that revolved around the concepts of military service and martial vertu to a
more relevant and effective early modern courtier-aristocrat identity that revolved
around concepts such as grâce, sprezzatura, and culture. As part of this transitional
process, the mounted display of noblesse moved from the battlefield to the manège,
and the display mechanism evolved from the medieval destrier to the early modern
equine danseur. By facilitating this shift in noble identity, horses and horsemanship
supported and assisted the nobility’s successful adaptation and its more effective
functionality, and thus ultimately contributed to its survival and continued vitality as
well.
367
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anglo, Sydney. “How to Win at Tournaments: The Technique of Chivalric Combat.”
Antiquaries Journal 68 (1988): 248-264.
Arditi, Jorge. A Genealogy of Manners: Transformations of Social Relations in
France and England from the Fourteenth to the Eighteenth Century.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998.
Ariès, Philippe. L’Enfant et la vie familiale sous l’Ancien Régime. Paris: Plon, 1960.
Babeau, Albert. Les Officiers. Vol. 2 of La Vie militaire sous l’Ancien Régime. 2
nd
ed. Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1890.
Barber, Richard, and Juliet Barker. Tournaments: Jousts, Chivalry, and Pageants in
the Middle Ages. Woodbridge, UK: Boydell, 1989.
Barthélemy, Edouard Marie de. Les Grands Ecuyers de la grande écurie de France
avant et depuis 1789. Paris: Librairie de la Société des Auteurs Dramatiques,
1868.
Bassompierre, François de. Mémoires du maréchal de Bassompierre [1665]. Edited
by Audoin de la Cropte de Chantérac. Vol. 1. Paris: Renouard, 1870.
Baumgartner, Frederic J. France in the Sixteenth Century. New York: St. Martin’s
Press, 1995.
Beik, William. Absolutism and Society in Seventeenth-Century France: State Power
and Provincial Aristocracy in Languedoc. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1985.
Billacois, François.Le Duel dans la société française des XVI
e
-XVII
e
siècles: Essai de
psycho-sociologie historique. Paris: Editions de l’Ecole des Hautes Etudes en
Sciences Sociales, 1986.
Bitton, Davis. The French Nobility in Crisis, 1560-1640. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press, 1969.
Bohanan, Donna. Old and New Nobility in Aix-en-Provence, 1600-1695: Portrait of
an Urban Elite. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1992.
Bouchard, Constance Brittain. “Strong of Body, Brave and Noble”: Chivalry and
Society in Medieval France. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1998.
368
Briggs, Robin. “From the German Forests to Civil Society: The Frankish Myth and
the Ancient Constitution in France.” In Civil Histories: Essays Presented to
Sir Keith Thomas, edited by Peter Burke, Brian Harrison, and Paul Slack.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Brockliss, Laurence. “Richelieu, Education, and the State.” In Richelieu and His
Age, edited by Joseph Bergin and Laurence Brockliss. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1992.
Burke, Peter. “The Courtier.” In Renaissance Characters, edited by Eugenio Garin.
Translated by Lydia G. Cochrane. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1991.
———. The Fortunes of the Courtier: The European Reception of Castiglione’s
Cortegiano. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1996.
Carabin, Denise. “Deux institutions de gentilshommes sous Louis XIII: Le
Gentilhomme de Pasquier et L’Instruction du Roy de Pluvinel.” XVII
e
siècle,
no. 218 (2003): 27-38.
Castiglione, Baldessare. The Book of the Courtier. Translated and annotated by
Leonard Eckstein Opdycke. Rev. ed. New York: Horace Liveright, 1929.
Originally published as Il Cortegiano (1528).
Chartier, Roger. “From Text to Manners. A Concept and Its Books: Civilité between
Aristocratic Distinction and Popular Appropriation.” In The Cultural Uses of
Print in Early Modern France. Translated by Lydia G. Cochrane. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press, 1987.
———. “La Noblesse française et les états généraux de 1614: Une Réaction
aristocratique?” In Représentation et vouloir politiques: Autour des états
généraux de 1614, edited by Roger Chartier and Denis Richet. Paris: Editions
de l’Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, 1982. Originally
published in Acta Poloniae Historica 36 (1977): 65-81.
Chartier, Roger, Marie-Madeleine Compère, and Dominique Julia. L’Education en
France du XVI
e
au XVIII
e
siècle. Paris: Société d’Edition d’Enseignement
Supérieur, 1976.
Christian, Arthur. L’Art équestre à Paris: Tournois, joûtes et carrousels, académies,
courses et cirques…. Paris: Roustan, 1907.
369
Clare, Lucien. La Quintaine, la course de bague et le jeu des têtes: Etude historique
et ethno-linguistique d’une famille de jeux équestres. Paris: Centre National
de la Recherche Scientifique, 1983.
Clayton, Hilary. “Seeing is Believing: How Slow-Motion Replay Photography Has
Impacted Our Understanding of Dressage Mechanics.” Dressage Today,
October 2005, 42-45.
Collins, David. “Illusions of Pirouettes.” Dressage Today, December 2005, 52-58.
Collins, James B. Classes, Estates, and Order in Early Modern Brittany. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Constant, Jean-Marie. “Absolutisme et modernité.” In Histoire des élites en France
du XVI
e
au XX
e
siècle: L’Honneur, le mérite, l’argent, edited by Guy
Chaussinand-Nogaret. Paris: Tallandier, 1991.
———. “Les Structures sociales et mentales de l’anoblissement: Analyse
comparative d’études récentes, XVI
e
-XVII
e
siècles.” In L’Anoblissement en
France, XV
e
-XVIII
e
siècles: Théories et réalités, compiled by Centre de
Recherches sur les Origines de l’Europe Moderne de l’Université de
Bordeaux III. Bordeaux: Maison des Sciences de l’Homme d’Aquitaine,
1985.
Contamine, Philippe, ed. Des Origines à 1715. Vol. 1 of Histoire militaire de la
France, edited by André Corvisier. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France,
1992.
———. Guerre, état et société à la fin du Moyen Age: Etudes sur les armées des
rois de France, 1337-1494. Paris: Mouton, 1972.
———. La Noblesse au royaume de France de Philippe le Bel à Louis XII: Essai de
synthèse. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1997.
———. “Les Tournois en France à la fin du moyen âge.” In Das Ritterliche Turnier
im Mittelalter: Beiträge zu einer vergleichende Formen- und
Verhaltensgeschichte des Rittertums, edited by Josef Fleckenstein. Göttingen,
Germany: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1985.
Corvisier, André. “La Noblesse militaire: Aspects militaires de la noblesse française
du XV
e
au XVIII
e
siècles; état des questions.” Histoire Sociale/Social History
11 (1978): 336-355.
370
Delcampe, [no first name given]. L’Art de monter à cheval: qui monstre la belle &
facille methode de se rendre bon homme de cheval … [1658]. 2
nd
rev. exp.
ed. Paris: Jacques le Gras, 1664.
Della Casa, Giovanni. Galateo. Translated and annotated by Konrad Eisenbichler
and Kenneth R. Bartlett. Toronto: Centre for Reformation and Renaissance
Studies, 1986. Originally published as Il Galateo (1558).
Devyver, André. Le Sang épuré: Les Préjugés de race chez les gentilshommes
français de l’Ancien Régime (1560-1720). Brussels: Editions de l’Université
de Bruxelles, 1973.
Dewald, Jonathan. Aristocratic Experience and the Origins of Modern Culture:
France, 1570-1715. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993.
———. The Formation of a Provincial Nobility: The Magistrates of the Parlement of
Rouen, 1499-1610. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1980.
Doucet, Corinne. “Les Académies équestres ou l’école de la noblesse.” In Les
Echanges entre les universités européennes à la Renaissance, edited by
Michel Bideaux and Marie-Madeleine Fragonard. Geneva: Droz, 2003.
Downing, Brian M. The Military Revolution and Political Change: Origins of
Democracy and Autocracy in Early Modern Europe. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press, 1992.
Duindam, Jeroen. Myths of Power: Norbert Elias and the Early Modern European
Court. Translated by Lorri S. Granger and Gerard T. Moran. Amsterdam:
Amsterdam University Press, 1994.
Dumolin, Maurice. “Les Académies parisiennes d’équitation.” Pts. 1-3. Bulletin de la
Société Archéologique, Historique et Artistique le Vieux Papier 111 (1925):
417-428; 112 (1925): 485-494; 113 (1926): 556-572.
Elias, Norbert. The Court Society. Translated by Edmund Jephcott. New York:
Pantheon Books, 1984.
———. The History of Manners. Vol. 1 of The Civilizing Process. Translated by
Edmund Jephcott. New York: Urizen Books, 1978.
———. Power and Civility. Vol. 2 of The Civilizing Process. Translated by Edmund
Jephcott. New York: Pantheon Books, 1982.
371
Eltis, David. The Military Revolution in Sixteenth-century Europe. London: Tauris,
1995.
Erasmus, Desiderius. On Good Manners for Boys. Translated and annotated by Brian
McGregor. In Literary and Educational Writings 3, edited by J. K. Sowards.
Vol. 25 of The Collected Works of Erasmus. Toronto: University of Toronto
Press, 1985. Originally published as De civilitate morum puerilium (1530).

Faret, Nicolas. L’Honneste Homme, ou L’Art de plaire à la court [1630]. Rev. ed.
Paris: Toussainct Quinet, 1636. Reprint, edited with introduction and notes
by Maurice Magendie. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1925. Page
references are to the 1925 edition.
Folly, Albert. “Les Académies d’armes (XVI
e
et XVII
e
siècles).” Bulletin de la
Société du VI
e
Arrondissement de Paris 2 (1899): 162-171.
Fox, Claire Gilbride. The Fairman Rogers Collection on the Horse and Equitation: A
History and Guide. Philadelphia: Medical Documentation Service of the
College of Physicians of Philadelphia for the School of Veterinary Medicine
at the University of Pennsylvania, 1975.
Gahwyler, Max. “The Legacy of the Masters.” The National Sporting Library
Newsletter 46 (1996): 6-7.
Gaier, Claude. “L’Opinion des chefs de guerre français du XVI
e
siècle sur les
progrès de l’art militaire.” Revue Internationale d’Histoire Militaire 29
(1970): 723-746.
Gillmor, Carroll. “Practical Chivalry: The Training of Horses for Tournaments and
Warfare.” In Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History, edited by J. A. S.
Evans and R. W. Unger. Ser. 2, vol. 13. New York: AMS, 1992.
Greengrass, Mark. France in the Age of Henri IV: The Struggle for Stability. 2
nd
ed.
London: Longman, 1995.
Guazzo, Stefano. The Civile Conversation of M. Steeven Guazzo: the first three
books translated by George Pettie, Anno 1581, and the fourth by
Bartholomew Young, Anno 1581. The Tudor Translations 2, vols. 7-8. New
York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1925. Originally published as La civil conversazione
(1574).
Guillet de St. George, Georges. Les Arts de l’homme d’epée, ou Le Dictionnaire du
gentilhomme. The Hague: Adrian Moetjens, 1680.
372
Hale, J. R. “The Military Education of the Officer Class in Early Modern Europe.” In
Renaissance War Studies. London: Hambledon, 1983. Originally published in
Cultural Aspects of the Italian Renaissance: Essays in Honour of Paul Oskar
Kristeller, edited by Cecil H. Clough (Manchester, UK: Manchester
University Press, 1976).

———. War and Society in Renaissance Europe, 1450-1620. Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1985.
Hall, Bert S. Weapons and Warfare in Renaissance Europe: Gunpowder,
Technology, and Tactics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997.
Harding, Robert R. Anatomy of a Power Elite: The Provincial Governors of Early
Modern France. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1978.
Hoche, Lucien. “Pluvinel et les académies.” Appendix 23 in Contribution à l’histoire
de Paris: Paris occidental, XII
e
siècle-XIX
e
siècle. Paris: Henri Leclerc, 1912.
Hünersdorff, Richard Baron von. Horsemanship 1528-1985: Five Centuries of
Equestrian Thought in Print; a Catalogue of the Outstanding Library
Formed by Ludwig Baron von Hünersdorff…. Wickmere, UK: Merrion, n.d.
[between 1985 and 1995].
Huth, Frederick H. Works on Horses and Equitation: A Bibliographical Record of
Hippology. London: Bernard Quaritch, 1887.
Hyland, Ann. The Warhorse, 1250-1600: From the Crusades to the End of the
Middle Ages. Stroud, UK: Sutton, 1998.
Jones, Archer. The Art of War in the Western World. Chicago: University of Illinois
Press, 1987.
Jouanna, Arlette. “Des ‘Gros et gras’ aux ‘gens d’honneur.’” In Histoire des élites en
France du XVI
e
au XX
e
siècle: L’Honneur, le mérite, l’argent, edited by Guy
Chaussinand-Nogaret. Paris: Tallandier, 1991.
———. Le Devoir de révolte: La Noblesse française et la gestation de l’état
moderne, 1559-1661. Paris: Fayard, 1989.
———. “Les Gentilshommes français et leur rôle politique dans la seconde moitié
du XVI
e
siècle et au début du XVII
e
.” Il Pensiero Politico 10 (1977): 22-40.
373
———. “L’Idée de race en France au XVIème siècle et au début du XVIIème siècle:
1498-1614.” Thèse d’état, Université de Paris IV, 1976.
———. “La Noblesse française et les valeurs guerrières au XVI
e
siècle.” In
L’Homme de guerre au XVI
e
siècle, edited by Gabriel-André Pérouse, André
Thierry, and André Tournon. Saint-Etienne, France: Publications de
l’Université de Saint-Etienne, 1989.
———. Ordre social: Mythes et hiérarchies dans la France du XVI
e
siècle. Paris:
Hachette, 1977.
———. “Perception et appréciation de l’anoblissement dans la France du XVI
e
siècle et du début du XVII
e
siècle.” In L’Anoblissement en France, XV
e
-
XVIII
e
siècles: Théories et réalités, compiled by Centre de Recherches sur les
Origines de l’Europe Moderne de l’Université de Bordeaux III. Bordeaux:
Maison des Sciences de l’Homme d’Aquitaine, 1985.
———. “Recherches sur la notion d’honneur au XVI
e
siècle.” Revue d’Histoire
Moderne et Contemporaine 15 (1968): 597-623.
Keen, Maurice. Chivalry. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1984.
La Broue, Salomon de. Le Cavalerice françois, contenant les preceptes principaux
qu’il faut observer exactement pour bien dresser les chevaux … [1593-1594].
2
nd
rev. exp. ed. Paris: Abel l’Angelier, 1602-1608.
La Guérinière, François Robichon de. Preface to L’Ecole de cavalerie, contenant la
connoissance, l’instruction, et la conservation du cheval. Paris: Jacques
Collombat, 1733.
La Noue, François de. Discours politiques et militaries. Basel: François Forest, 1587.
Reprint, edited with introduction and notes by F. E. Sutcliffe. Geneva: Droz,
1967. Page references are to the 1967 edition.
La Noue, Pierre de. La Cavalerie françoise et italienne, ou L’Art de bien dresser les
chevaux, selon les preceptes des bonnes écoles des deux nations….
Strasbourg: Jac. de Heyden, 1620.
La Roche, Commandant de [no first name given]. “Les Académies militaires sous
l’Ancien Régime, d’après des documents inédits.” Revue des Etudes
Historiques (1929): 409-418.
374
Labatut, Jean-Pierre. Les Noblesses européennes de la fin du XV
e
siècle à la fin du
XVIII
e
siècle. Paris: Presses Universitaire de France, 1978.
Lazard, Madeleine. Pierre de Bourdeille, seigneur de Brantôme. Paris: Fayard, 1995.
Littauer, Valdimir S. The Development of Modern Riding: The Story of Formal
Riding from Renaissance Times to the Present. New York: Howell, 1962.
Long, Kathleen P., ed. High Anxiety: Masculinity in Crisis in Early Modern France.
Kirksville, MO: Truman State University Press, 2002.
Mackay-Smith, Alexander. “Riding in the Renaissance and in the Baroque Period.”
In The Royal Horse and Rider: Painting, Sculpture, and Horsemanship,
1500-1800, by Walter Liedtke. New York: Abaris, 1989.
Magendie, Maurice. La Politesse mondaine et les théories de l'honnêteté en France
au XVII
e
siècle, de 1600 à 1650. 2 vols. Paris: Presses Universitaires de
France, 1925.
Major, J. Russell. From Renaissance Monarchy to Absolute Monarchy: French
Kings, Nobles, and Estates. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press,
1994.
Marston, Thomas E. “Books on Horses.” Yale University Library Gazette 39 (1965):
105-136.
Mégret-Lacan, Marie-Christine. “Naissance de l’art équestre.” XVII
e
siècle, no. 204
(1999): 523-548.
Mennessier de la Lance, Gabriel René. Essai de bibliographie hippique. 2 vols. and
supplement. Paris: Lucien Dorbon, 1915-1917 and 1921.
Menou de Charnizay, René de. La Pratique du cavalier, ou L’Exercice de monter à
cheval … [1612]. Rev. exp. ed. Paris: Guillaume & Jean Baptiste Loyson,
1650.
Mettam, Roger. “The French Nobility, 1610-1715.” In Western Europe. Vol. 1 of
The European Nobilities in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, edited
by H. M. Scott. New York: Longman, 1995.
———. Power and Faction in Louis XIV’s France. New York: Blackwell, 1988.
Monteilhet, André. Les Maîtres de l’œuvre équestre. Paris: Odège, 1979.
375
Motley, Mark. Becoming a French Aristocrat: The Education of the Court Nobility,
1580-1715. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990.
Mousnier, Roland. Les Institutions de la France sous la monarchie absolue, 1598-
1789. 2 vols. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1974-1980.
Muchembled, Robert. L’Invention de l’homme moderne: Culture et sensibilités en
France du XV
e
au XVIII
e
siècle. Paris: Fayard, 1994.
———. Société, cultures et mentalités dans la France moderne: XVI
e
-XVIII
e
siècle.
2
nd
ed. Paris: Armand Colin, 1994.
Nelson, Hilda. “Antoine de Pluvinel: Classical Horseman and Humanist.”
Introduction to Le Maneige royal [1623], by Antoine de Pluvinel. Translated
by Hilda Nelson. London: J. A. Allen, 1989.
Neuschel, Kristen. Word of Honor: Interpreting Noble Culture in Sixteenth-Century
France. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1989.
Nickel, Helmut. “The Tournament: An Historical Sketch.” In The Study of Chivalry:
Resources and Approaches, edited by Howell Chickering and Thomas H.
Seiler. Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute Publications [at] Western Michigan
University, 1988.
Niemyer, Elisabeth. The Reign of the Horse: The Horse in Print, 1500-1715; An
Exhibition at the Folger Shakespeare Library…. With introduction by
Anthony Dent. Washington, DC: Folger Library Publications, 1991.
Nordhaus, John David. “Arma et Litterae: The Education of the Noblesse de Race in
Sixteenth-Century France.” Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1974.
Oman, Charles. A History of the Art of War in the Sixteenth Century. New York:
Dutton, 1937. Reprint, New York: AMS, 1979. Page references are to the
1979 edition.
Origny, Pierre d’. Le Hérault de la noblesse de France. Reims: Jean de Foigny,
1578. Reprint, Paris: J. B. Dumoulin, 1875. Page references are to the 1875
edition.
Parisse, Michel. “Le Tournoi en France. des origines à la fin du XIII
e
siècle.” In Das
Ritterliche Turnier im Mittelalter: Beiträge zu einer vergleichende Formen-
und Verhaltensgeschichte des Rittertums, edited by Josef Fleckenstein.
Göttingen, Germany: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1985.
376
Parker, Geoffrey. The Military Revolution: Military Innovation and the Rise of the
West, 1500-1800. 2
nd
ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
Parrott, David. “Richelieu, the Grands, and the French Army.” In Richelieu and His
Age, edited by Joseph Bergin and Laurence Brockliss. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1992.
Plamenatz, John. “In Search of Machiavellian Virtù.” In The Prince, by Niccolò
Machiavelli. Translated and edited by Robert M. Adams. New York: W. W.
Norton, 1977. Originally published in The Political Calculus: Essays on
Machiavelli’s Philosophy, edited by Anthony Parel (Toronto: University of
Toronto Press, 1972).
Pluvinel, Antoine de. L’Instruction du Roy en l’exercice de monter à cheval…. Paris:
Michel Nivelle, 1625.
Podeschi, John B., comp. Books on the Horse and Horsemanship: Riding, Hunting,
Breeding and Racing, 1400-1941. Vol. 4 of Sport in Art and Books: The Paul
Mellon Collection. London: Tate Gallery for the Yale Center of British Art,
1981.
Podhajsky, Alois. The Complete Training of Horse and Rider in the Principles of
Classical Horsemanship. Translated by Eva Podhajsky and V. D. S.
Williams. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967.
Pontaymery, Alexandre de. L’Academie, ou Institution de la noblesse françoise.
Paris: Jamet Mettayer & Pierre L’Huillier, 1595. Reprinted in Oeuvres (Paris:
Jean Richer, 1599). Page references are to the 1599 edition.
Potter, David. War and Government in the French Provinces: Picardy 1470-1560.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Prosser, Gareth. “The Later Medieval French Noblesse.” In France in the Later
Middle Ages, edited by David Potter. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
Raber, Karen, and Treva J. Tucker, eds. The Culture of the Horse: Status, Discipline,
and Identity in the Early Modern World. New York: Palgrave, 2005.
Raber, Karen. “Reasonable Creatures: William Cavendish and the Art of Dressage.”
In Renaissance Culture and the Everyday, edited by Patricia Fumerton and
Simon Hunt. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999.
377
Revel, Jacques. “The Uses of Civility.” In Passions of the Renaissance, edited by
Roger Chartier. Translated by Arthur Goldhammer. Vol. 3 of A History of
Private Life, edited by Philippe Ariès and Georges Duby. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press, 1989.
Rice, Eugene F., Jr. “Humanism in France.” In Humanism Beyond Italy. Vol. 2 of
Renaissance Humanism: Foundations, Forms, and Legacy, edited by Albert
Rabil, Jr. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1988.
Rogers, Clifford J., ed. The Military Revolution Debate: Readings on the Military
Transformation of Early Modern Europe. Boulder, CO: Westview, 1995.
Saulx, Jean de. Preface to Mémoires de très-noble & très-illustre Gaspard de Saulx,
seigneur de Tavannes … [ca. 1610]. In Nouvelle Collection des mémoires
relatifs à l’histoire de France depuis le XIII
e
siècle jusqu’à la fin du XVIII
e
siècle, edited by Joseph Fr. Michaud and Jean Joseph François Poujoulat. Ser.
1, vol. 8. Paris: Didier, 1854.
Saurel, Etienne. Histoire de l’équitation, des origines à nos jours. Paris: Stock, 1971.
Sauval, Henri. Histoire et recherches des antiquités de la ville de Paris [ca. 1650]. 3
vols. Paris: Charles Moette, 1724, and Paris: Jacques Chardon, 1724. Reprint,
Westmead, UK: Gregg International, 1969. Page references are to the 1969
edition.
Scaglione, Aldo. Knights at Court: Courtliness, Chivalry, and Courtesy from
Ottonian Germany to the Italian Renaissance. Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1991.
Schalk, Ellery. “The Appearance and Reality of Nobility in France during the Wars
of Religion: An Example of How Collective Attitudes Can Change.” Journal
of Modern History 48 (1976): 19-31
———. “The Court as ‘Civilizer’ of Nobility: Noble Attitudes and the Court in
France in the Late Sixteenth and Early Seventeenth Centuries.” In Princes,
Patronage and the Nobility: The Court at the Beginning of the Modern Age,
ca. 1450-1650, edited by Ronald G. Asch and Adolf M. Birke. Oxford:
Oxford University Press for the German Historical Institute London, 1991.
———. From Valor to Pedigree: Ideas of Nobility in France in the Sixteenth and
Seventeenth Centuries. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1986.
378
———. “Pluvinel, le renouvellement de la noblesse et les prémices de l’Ecole de
Versailles.” In Les Ecuries royales du XVI
e
au XVIII
e
siècle, edited by Daniel
Reytier. Paris: Association pour l’Académie d’Art Equestre de Versailles,
1998.
Smith, Jay M. The Culture of Merit: Nobility, Royal Service, and the Making of the
Absolute Monarchy in France, 1600-1789. Ann Arbor: University of
Michigan Press, 1996.
Supple, James. Arms versus Letters: The Military and Literary Ideals in the “Essais”
of Montaigne. Oxford: Clarendon, 1984.
Tallett, Frank. War and Society in Early-Modern Europe, 1495-1715. New York:
Routledge, 1992.
Terrebasse, Hubert de. Antoine de Pluvinel, dauphinois, 1552-1620. Lyon: L. Brun,
1911.
Tucker, Treva J. “Eminence over Efficacy: Social Status and Cavalry Service in
Sixteenth-Century France.” Sixteenth Century Journal 23 (2001): 1057-1098.
Vigarello, Georges. Le Corps redressé: Histoire d’un pouvoir pedagogique. Paris:
Jean-Pierre Delarge, 1978.
———. Le Propre et le sale: L’Hygiène du corps depuis le Moyen Age. Paris: Seuil,
1985.
———. “The Upward Training of the Body from the Age of Chivalry to Courtly
Civility.” In Fragments for a History of the Human Body, edited by Michel
Feher, Ramona Naddaf, and Nadia Tazi. Pt. 2. New York: Zone, 1989.
Watanabe-O’Kelly, Helen. “The Equestrian Ballet in Seventeenth-Century Europe:
Origin, Description, Development.” German Life & Letters 36 (1983): 198-
212.
———. “New Horses and New Horsemanship in the Sixteenth Century.” In
Triumphall Shews: Tournaments at German-Speaking Courts in Their
European Context, 1560-1730. Berlin: Mann, 1992.
———. “Tournaments and Their Relevance for Warfare in the Early Modern
Period.” European History Quarterly 20 (1990): 451-463.
379
———. “Tournaments in Europe.” In Spectaculum Europæum: Theatre and
Spectacle in Europe (1580-1750), edited by Pierre Béhar and Helen
Watanabe-O’Kelly. Wiesbaden, Germany: Harrassowitz, 1999.
Wells, Ellen B. Horsemanship: A Bibliography of Printed Materials from the
Sixteenth Century through 1974. New York: Garland, 1985.
Wintroub, Michael. “Words, Deeds, and a Womanly King.” French Historical
Studies 28 (2005): 387-413.
Wood, James B. The King’s Army: Warfare, Soldiers, and Society during the Wars
of Religion in France, 1562-1576. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1996.
———. The Nobility of the Election of Bayeux, 1463-1666: Continuity through
Change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1980.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study argues that horses and horsemanship played a crucial role in refashioning noble identity in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century France. During this period, the traditional nobility experienced a variety of military, political, social, and cultural changes in its circumstances. Part of the nobles' response to these changes was to gradually restructure the way they perceived and defined themselves. Between roughly 1550 and 1650, they transitioned from a medieval warrior-knight identity to an early modern courtier-aristocrat identity.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Strengthening Catholic identity: the role of an academic dean in strategic planning

PDF

Sensemaking of an identity change: a case study in higher education investigating the role of the academic vice president in facilitating change

PDF

The role of co-constructed community, school, and university partnerships in providing adult agents to support learner identities among urban youth

Asset Metadata

Creator Tucker, Treva Jean (author)

Core Title From destrier to danseur: the role of the horse in early modern French noble identity

School College of Letters, Arts and Sciences

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program History

Publication Date 01/06/2019

Defense Date 05/08/2007

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag 16th century,17th century,equestrian,France,Nobility,OAI-PMH Harvest

Place Name France (countries)

Language English

Advisor Accampo, Elinor (committee chair), Howe, Eunice (committee member), Neuschel, Kristen (committee member)

Creator Email tjtucker@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m592

Unique identifier UC1194520

Identifier etd-Tucker-20070707 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-531965 (legacy record id),usctheses-m592 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Tucker-20070707.pdf

Dmrecord 531965

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Tucker, Treva Jean

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu