PACES OF THE HORSE. 



145 



from tlie amble, and that if we wished to make a methodical 

 classification, we should group them in a series of which the 

 amble would be the first term, and all the other terms would 

 be obtained by means of an increasing anticipation of th 

 movements of the hinder limbs. Fig. 41 represents this series. 

 In the notation of each kind of pace, we have left on the same 

 vertical the impact of the right fore-foot, which we shall choose 

 as the commencement of each pace, and which will serve as 

 a point of reference to characterise each kind of locomotion. 



This table, prepared from different treatises on the horse, 

 represents as faithfully as we have been able to depict it, 

 that which each author admits as constituting each particular 

 kind of pace. The explanatory notes show the disagreement 

 which exists between the various theories relative to the suc- 

 cession of movements which characterise each of them. Thus 

 we see, that with the exception of the amble, on which all 

 are agreed, all the other kinds of paces are defined in a 

 di£Perent manner by various authors. Thus, the notation 

 No. 2, which, according to Merche, would correspond with 

 the broken amble, would be, according to Bouley, the expres- 

 sion of the high step, or the pace of Norman ponies ; while 

 this same Norman pace would be, according to Lecoq, that 

 which is represented in No. 9. We also see that the notation 

 of No. 3 would correspond, according to Merche, with the 

 ordinary step of a pacing horse, while Bouley would consider it 

 as a broken amble, and Lecoq the traquenade ; which traqnenade, 

 according to Merche, would not differ from the pace repre- 

 sented by the notation No. 10. The ordinary walking pace 

 itself is not understood in the same manner by different 

 writers, and if the greater part of them, with Vincent and 

 Goiffon, Colin, Bouley, &c., admit in this pace a succession of 

 impacts at unequal intervals, it is to be observed that the 

 theory of Lecoq and Eaabe, concerning the normal pace, is 

 different. 



This disagreement can easily be explained : first, the 

 observation of these movements is very difficult ; then, each 

 pace must naturally present, according to the conditions 

 under which it is studied, the different forms which each 

 writer has arbitrarily taken as the type of the normal walking 



