My post on Saddles 101 gave rise to a whole sequence of reader questions. I love reader questions. Here I’m going to answer one particular set, which is best summed up in Troyce’s comment:
An interesting addendum to this essay would be one about the style of riding and how the rider sits.
As I noted in my post, a saddle is a structure designed to serve as an interface between the rider’s seat and legs and the horse’s back. It can be as basic as a piece of leather or other flexible, breathable material (fabric, synthetic) shaped to the horse, with some form of attachment that holds it in place—again, most basically, a strap around the horse’s barrel. There may be additional straps to stabilize it fore (a breast collar) and/or aft (a crupper). (And maybe a second girth or cinch in a Western saddle.)
But here we’re talking about how the structure of the saddle determines where and how the rider sits on the horse’s back. Some of that is style, i.e. form, and some is function. The definition of what “looks good on a horse” has a lot to do with style, but it’s also related to the optimal way to stay on board when the horse does whatever the style of riding is about.
For this post I’m going to talk about the common or garden variety of saddle that you’re likely to find in North America or the UK. I’ll devote another post later on to the less well known or the historical variety. That includes the sidesaddle and the many forms of military/war saddles.
So. First, the familiar. A Western saddle has a lot of structure to it. It’s built big and high. It has a large swell in front and a horn on top of that, and a fairly high cantle behind. There’s a good amount of surface area underneath, where it sits on the horse’s back.
It’s designed to be ridden in for hours, which means it has to be comfortable for both horse and rider. The position it tends to encourage sets the rider fairly far back on the horse, with the legs fairly long and set forward. It’s the recliner of the saddle world.
A rider in that position is well placed to sit back as the horse negotiates steep slopes both up and down. It allows them to brace when the horse slides to a stop, or when the rope pulls taut with a cow on the other end. It’s not a saddle that gives close contact with the horse’s back and movement. It’s designed to insulate against sudden moves and, to a degree, roughness of gait. Though the ideal Western horse is very smooth-gaited and easy to sit. Again, it’s all about comfort for the long haul.
Much the same applies to the Australian stock saddle. It doesn’t usually have a horn, and the shape is more “English”, with a smaller surface area underneath. But it’s designed for long rides, again, and it’s meant for comfort. There’s a fair amount of structure to it, with provides insulation from the horse’s movement. The Australian rider will tend to sit more upright than the Western rider, but the two riders are doing a lot of the same things. They’re working riders, getting the job done out on the range or in the outback.
The various incarnations of “English” saddles are a bit different. They’re more specialized in what they do, and they set the rider up for specific positions.
The saddle-seat saddle is almost completely flat, often cut back to open up space for the horse’s withers. The rider sits relatively far back, in some cases almost to the horse’s hip, with a long stirrup and a forward leg and an upright body position, with the hands high. There’s a lot of form to go with the function: shows have multiple classes labeled “equitation,” in which riders are judged on their position according to the saddle-seat standard. Equitation riders are at base riding in the optimal position for the style, but fad and fashion have a lot to do with how the riders are judged.
(I should note that Western riders have their own version of this. It’s called Western Pleasure. It is…a thing.)
The close-contact or jumping saddle is pretty much the exact opposite of the saddle-seat saddle. It sits well forward on the horse’s back, and it positions the rider well forward as well. It’s not meant to be sat in for any significant period.
The point of the exercise is to ride over fences. The rider rides in what’s called a “two-point,” lifted up and out of the saddle with the upper body leaning forward. It’s like a very elongated version of the jockey’s seat in a racing saddle, with a similar purpose: to stay out of the horse’s way while it clears a fence or races around a track. Jockey stirrups are almost vanishingly short, to keep the rider completely out of the saddle. Hunter-jumper stirrups are longer and allow the rider to sit in between fences, but they’re still very short by Western and saddle-seat standards. The rider is ready at any point to lift up and sit forward and go.
These types of saddles have been most familiar through the years, but in recent decades another type and style of riding equipment has taken over a fair share of the market: the dressage saddle. Dressage is a European import with a long history on that continent, and its own range of saddles. What’s come over to the Americas is a relatively recent design. It’s “English” in concept and basic shape. No horn. Intended for fairly short workouts in a riding arena, performing specific patterns and movements to a particular standard.
Buy the Book
A Marvellous Light
Compared to a jumping saddle, it’s long and oval in the flaps. It covers less square footage than a saddle-seat saddle, with a notable amount of engineering, and sometimes quite a bit of buildup, though nothing to compare to the Western saddle. It sits farther back than the jumping saddle but not as far back as the saddle-seat saddle; it’s meant to position the rider over the horse’s center of gravity.
The rider in a dressage saddle sits perpendicular to the back of the horse, an upright seat with the leg beneath the body. The line from shoulder to hip to heel should be straight. Hands are lower than the saddle-seat hands. Stirrups are longer than the jumper stirrups, by several inches, though there’s still an angle to the knee.
The point of the exercise is to remain poised over that equine center of gravity, no matter what the horse is doing. The principle is to train the horse so well that they’re always balanced and relaxed and obedient, and able to perform a large number of gaits and movements at the rider’s command. Ideally, the saddle doesn’t have to be highly constructed at all; the performance saddle of the Spanish Riding School is remarkably minimalist, with just enough structure fore and aft to support the rider through the Airs Above the Ground, which include the courbette (horse vertical on hindlegs, jumping forward multiple times) and capriole (whole horse in the air, parallel to the ground, kicking backward violently with the hindlegs).
But those are world-class riders trained from their teens to ride in this manner. Even they train and practice in conventional dressage saddles, though those are, again, fairly simply constructed. On the other end of the spectrum are dressage saddles that effectively lock the rider in place, allowing very little flexibility as to position and movement in the saddle.
There’s a reason for that however. The horse in vogue for competition is exceptionally large and exceptionally powerful, with tremendous scope in the gaits. It’s very hard to sit such a horse without being an extreme athlete in one’s own right. One way to try to compensate for lesser skill and fitness is to build a saddle that creates the position for the rider.
On a personal note I’ll say that I love the big boingities and I am not a fan of the coercively engineered saddle. I’ve also ridden mountain trails in a basic-model dressage saddle with a slightly deep, lightly padded seat. It’s fairly comfortable if it’s a fit for both rider and horse.
By the same token, a poorly fitting Western saddle can be excruciating. My usual problem is that it’s too wide in the twist, aka the part directly underneath my seat. I also have a tropism toward the dressage position, which can be a battle in a saddle that wants me to sit back with my feet in front of me, relatively speaking. I actually have a Western saddle that allows that (leather and cordura Big Horn, for those who may wonder), thanks to the way the stirrups are attached.
But that I’ll get into in another post.
Judith Tarr is a lifelong horse person. She supports her habit by writing works of fantasy and science fiction as well as historical novels, many of which have been published as ebooks. She’s written a primer for writers who want to write about horses: Writing Horses: The Fine Art of Getting It Right. She lives near Tucson, Arizona with a herd of Lipizzans, a clowder of cats, and a blue-eyed dog.
I’ve been re-reading the Wheel of time and Jordan keeps mentioning ‘comfortable’ high cantled saddles for the long journeys his characters take. I wonder if he was a rider?
My weird “battle in the saddle” is riding my lawn tractor. I’ve spent years trying to stop balancing with my feet instead of keeping my butt in the seat with its dead-man’s switch. The engine cutting off is not a good thing on a 45 degree slope. I still use my knees, though, to keep from sliding off. And, of course, there’s patting the tractor’s “withers” to say it’s done a good job before I cut it off. Yes, I am weird.
A teensy nitpick (or question) here — should a rider sit back on a steep uphill slope? I always stood in my stirrups and leaned as far forward over my horse’s withers as necessary for balance. But then, my saddle of choice was the Aussie stock saddle.
Thank you Judith for another interesting view into the world of horses. (I’ll admit to being a complete newbie to their nature and lore). I have used some of your articles as a great jumping off point to learning a little more about horses in history. I’m writing a horse in my current NaNo project, and I’m trying to make him more than just a prop.
Have you done an article on horses in winter? That will probably be my next challenge to learn.
Hi Judith,
Id love an opinion on Aerin ‘s saddle making for talat in the hero and the crown. I’m not not a horse person, but I assume Robin McKinley is. What is she doing? Ann
Loved this! I ride in a close contact saddle to jump (hunter and equitation over fences), and I frequently explain to my family and friends that my saddle isn’t like the ones John Wayne used, nor is it like the ones that jockeys use… no, not like the ones they saw in the Olympics in dressage… Always such surprise that there is more than one kind of saddle!!
@5, I though of that too. Eliminating the stirrups struck me as a very bad move for cavalry.
Dear Judith,
Thank you for your words on saddles and rider positions. I have ridden in all of the saddles you described, with the exception of the Saddle-seat. I was trained to ride and show in a Western saddle. However, the saddle I rode in was designed by an innovative “cowboy” named Monty Foreman. He designed a Western saddle called the “Balanced Ride”, made by Fallis Saddlery. Monty’s saddle sits the rider over the legs on the horse’s center of gravity, with close leg contact due to paring down the design of the stirrup leathers and girth strap. Please have a look at Monty’s saddle, you will love it. Sincerely, Kathy
P.S. I have loved Lippizaners since I was three. You must walk on air every day, soaking up their beauty.
Dear Ms. Tarr, perhaps because I am OLD, seventy-eight all but an eyelash, and have ridden before I walked. My mother carried me in front of her, and she learned to ride from her grandmother who in turn was that rare thing a female horse breaker and trainer in Kansas. I find I must take issue with some of what you have written and concluded in your commentary.
The “correct” style of riding — absent racing — is the same for ALL disciplines: head, shoulder, hip, knee in line; back straight and although erect, relaxed and the weight balanced on the pelvic triangle. Any other posture is fashion, fad, and hell on the horse! Riding bareback demonstrates this posture. Saddles were created for various purposes, mostly I suspect in the beginning because guys did not wear (well, nobody much did) underwear and sweaty, hairy horsebacks and “male parts” in contact over time make saddles q.e.d. Saddles were also created to give security during warfare: first as a brace/ balance for the archer, then ditto for a lancer or sword/axe wielder. Gradually, at least “in the West as in Europe” the advent of heavier and heavier armor coupled with the adoption of the stirrup in turn militated (sorry) for the high cantle and similarly deformed pommel; guys in cans have very little balance and practically zilch ability to shift weight in a timely fashion. Otherwise, the cantle and pommel were fixtures for tying “stuff” on for ordinary riders and travelers and allowing the “ladies,” poor things, the old or the inept to have a handle to cling to while ahorse. Look at saddles in other cultures, and except where “armor” was in play, they were and remain VERY basic and the “seat” is as stated: balanced from top of the head through the neck and shoulder to the hip and knee. Period.
The abomination of the “Western” saddle in turn is a modification of the Spanish military saddle. The “Mexican” cowboy learned to catch and hold the newly almost feral imported cattle by lassoing them. There remain still two styles of “roping” : the hard tie and the dally. In the old days, a real working cowboy’s style could be told by whether he was missing fingers. I first rode “Western” at five, taught by two old guys in Bartlesville, Oklahoma, who had served on the old 101 and in its “Wild West Show” one of the many such touring in the early 1900’s.Their saddles, either single or double “rigged” depending on the roping style, had a higher thin “horn” and higher cantle than these things you have characterized as “recliners” and I assure you they did NOT lean back or stick their legs out in front. They were RIDERS and rode correctly because they DID spend hours, hours and hours in the saddle. My mother and I rode English, and I assure you that neither man laughed at her saddle, which had been made for her, to measure, by the Shipley Saddle Company of Kansas City when she was sixteen. She too rode erect, balanced, and
“correctly.” All this other fol-de-rol, is just that.
I learned “Western” but hated it because the saddle was heavy, even my child’s version, and it was hard to “cinch” in the “old days” as opposed to the easier buckle girth, apt to loosen, and slide. There is, I am sure, a reason why knights had squires….
Please, Ms. Tarr, I know you have Lippanzaners, the descendants of the Spanish/Roman war horse. They are NOT big, heavy (dumb) horses and they are the epitome of dressage and what the French call haute ecole; WHY would you say what you did about “dressage”? Dressage is now debased to fit the klutzy carriage horses being utilized, but real “dressage” as you know does NOT need a “dressage saddle, just a good rider, seated correctly and atune to his or her mount!
All these “saddles” with the exception of the knight’s and to a limited extent the “Western” (mostly for competitive roping and that abusive “barrel racing,” are fads, designed to sell ever more expensive fabrications. That includes the so called “balance seat” mentioned above as a creation of Monty Foreman. It’s all to sell, not to make better riders or more comfortable horses.
Oh, yes, and the “saddle seat” a.k.a. park saddle is made with a “cut back” because the American Saddlebred has a large, open and free shoulder. The cut back, actually perfected as the Lane Fox Park saddle, is designed to let the horse move freely and with higher action. Time has caused riders of the so-called saddle seat to sit ever further back, but a simple look at the older pictures and movies of GREAT riders from the 1930’s into the 50’s show them seated, perhaps a bit farther back because of the Saddlebred’s action and shoulder, but erect, balanced and correct. The hands were higher because of the longer elegant neck and use of the full bridle.
@1 I’m not sure. Everyone who is a fan of the books loves the mare Bela, so he did at least have some feeling for horses.
@2 Ha! Yes! We all “ride” our cars and trucks, too. And hold dog leashes and other straplike objects like reins.
@3 Yes, one should sit forward riding uphill. But the rider may have to go against the position the saddle is designed to encourage. Just as a jumping saddle allows one to sit well back going steeply downhill or on the downward side of a big cross-country obstacle, but the position of most comfort will be up and forward.
@@.-@ Honestly, I did, but it was on another site, now gone, and I see I need to remedy that. Meanwhile, I have done other seasons. Spring, here, and summer, here. Let me put something together for the next article. It’s great timing anyway, and I can tackle the rest of the saddle questions in the new year.
@5 That needs an article of its own. Note taken, and thank you for the prompt!
@8 Thank you for the nice words. I just got in from a Patreon-photo session with the White Ones, in fact. And thank you very much for the saddle recommendation.
@9 Because this is a large, public site with a wide variety of readers and commenters, I have to be particularly attentive to the tone of what I write. This is not the place to air certain types and levels of personal opinion.
Please note also that this article is written in response to specific questions from readers. I am not asked, here, to pass judgment on the types of horses that are currently in vogue for international dressage, or for any other equestrian discipline. Nor am I asked to determine the pros and cons of certain types of saddles and riding. Only to point out the ways in which the design of a saddle affects the position of a rider. That was the question, and that was the purpose of my answer.
Would you consider doing a post about side-saddles?
@11 I’ve never ridden in one, but I could put a post together. I’m sure I’d get knowledgeable comments to round out what I say–that’s one of the wonderful things about this place.
Oddly I was thinking about some of this yesterday-I and most other people, are told that to sit far back on a horse’s back can make them sore and is harder on the horse just in general. I can readily believe this. So why would a western saddle force a rider further back on the horse’s back? Wouldn’t that be harder for a working horse who had to go all day?
And standing in the stirrups doesn’t make your weight go away, right? It takes all the weight that was spread out on the saddle and puts it on the stirrup bars. Some folk aren’t sympathetic riders but I would think that if you could follow the horse’s motion, having that weight spread out on the saddle would be better.
i dead appreciated.
Regards,
Andrea
@13 A Western saddle puts the rider farther back than a jumping saddle, and the position is a little more legs-forward than a dressage saddle, but it’s not really that far back. It’s all a matter of inches and centimeters.
The thing about weight is, there’s a basic equation of weight of horse to weight of rider, but the balance of both is extremely important. If the rider is heavier than the horse can ideally carry–i.e., more than 25% of the horse’s weight–over the course of a long ride, the horse will feel the stress, and may break down. But if the rider is extremely well balanced and stays over the center of gravity as much as possible, they can minimize the effect of their weight on the horse. They won’t eliminate it but they will make it easier.
Likewise, if the rider is quite lightweight but very poorly balanced, the horse will struggle to stay under them, and may be pulled off balance by the rider. This could be catastrophic on a steep slope, for example; the rider lurches sideways just as the horse comes around a corner on the narrow ledge, and knocks the horse off the ledge. Even on the flat, a rider who is not meshing with the horse’s movement will make the horse’s job much harder, and over time will cause actual injury to the horse. Not every horse can or will shed the unbalanced weight, either. Some will just grit their teeth and endure–and suffer the consequences to their physical soundness.
Adding to which, a really good rider is not standing in the stirrups. They’re balancing on the horse’s back, using the stirrups as stabilizers. That’s why it’s possible to post a trot bareback. It’s not the stirrups that do it. It’s the rider’s balance and the strength and flexibility of their core.
Capriole, have you ever discussed Xenophon? His books The Art of Horsemanship and The Cavalry Commander were standard texts on horsemanship in the classical age. And from the European Renaissance into the twentieth century.
@16 Not here, but yes, I have read him (and some of the later masters as well). Good suggestion for a future article. Thank you.
Just here to chime in on Ann McMillan’s question about Aerin’s saddle-making. Thanks to Ann for raising it, to princessroxana for echoing it, and to Judith Tarr for promising to address it in a future article!