PROPORTIONS
Inasmuch as we have taken for granted, in connection with the present
volume, that before entering on the study of the anatomy of quadrupeds
the reader was prepared for it by a sufficient knowledge of human
anatomy, it is quite natural that we should extend the same supposition
to the study of proportions.
For this reason, the definition of proportions, considered from a
general point of view, their signification, their function and their
utility, are questions which it would be superfluous to enter upon here.
We will content ourselves by calling to mind that the common measure
chosen by preference is the length of the head, and that, ordinarily, it
is with it that we compare the dimensions of other parts.
Among the animals whose structure we have examined, there is one of
which the proportions deserve to be marked in preference to every other:
this is the horse.
Wherefore this preference? In the first place, it is because of the
overwhelming position which this animal occupies in the artistic
representation of quadrupeds; that it is more frequently associated with
man; that, notwithstanding its division into different races, its
general proportions may be referred to a special type.
It is also because the indications relative to these proportions will
suffice to show the way which the artist must follow in order to find
for himself, at the time when the necessity for it arises, the
proportions which characterize the other animals.
Our intention is not, in connection with the subject which now occupies
us, to enter into a deep discussion on the various opinions which have
been set forth. We desire, above all, to give some indications which,
from the practical point of view, can be utilized in the representation
of the horse, and at the beginning to demonstrate the advantages of
these indications. Now, there is a fact which we have had occasion to
note; it is the following: almost invariably, when a person who is
little accustomed to represent the horse, or not previously informed of
certain proportions of lengths, begins to draw from nature, the error
generally committed is that of making the head too small and the body
too long. Is it a preconceived idea which is the cause that one regards
them in this manner? Perhaps. At all events, certain artists who have
made the representation of horses their special study have even had this
habit. It is therefore necessary to be informed of the proportions; this
is the object of the study which we are now undertaking.
Bourgelat,[37] in the eighteenth century, fixed for the first time and
in complete fashion the proportions of the horse; it is he,
consequently, who created the aesthetics of the horse. It is but justice
to recall the fact. His system has a point of analogy with that which is
employed to determine the human proportions. Indeed, Bourgelat chose the
length of the head as a standard of measurement, and the subdivisions of
the head for measures of less extent. 'Since beauty,' said he,[38]
'resides in the congruity and proportion of the parts, it is absolutely
necessary to observe the dimensions, individual and relative, and in
order to acquire a knowledge of the proportions, to assume a kind of
measure which can be indiscriminately common for all horses. The part
which can serve as a standard of proportion for all the others is the
head. Take a measurement between two parallel lines--one tangent to the
nape of the neck or the summit of the forelock, the other tangent to
the extremity of the anterior lip--a line perpendicular to these two
tangents will give you its geometrical length. Divide this length into
three portions, and give to these three parts a special name, which may
be applied indefinitely to all heads--as, for example, that of _prime_.
Any head whatsoever will, accordingly, in its geometrical length, always
have three _primes_; but all the parts which you will have to consider,
whether in their length, in their height, or in their width, cannot
constantly have either one prime, or a prime and a half, or three
primes; subdivide, then, each _prime_ into three equal parts, which you
will name _seconds_, and as this subdivision will not suffice to give
you a just measure of all the parts, subdivide anew each _second_ into
twenty-four _points_, so that a head divided into three _primes_ will
have, by the second division, nine _seconds_, and two hundred and
sixteen _points_ by the last.'
[37] Claude Bourgelat, founder of the veterinary schools in France. He
was born at Lyons in 1712, and died at Paris in 1779.
[38] Bourgelat, 'Elements de l'art veterinaire. Traite de la
conformation exterieure du cheval,' Paris, edition of 1785, p.
133.
But where this system appears to us to have lost somewhat of its unity
is when the author transforms it, in pointing out the following mode of
procedure: 'But the head itself may err by default of proportion. This
part is not, indeed, considered as either too short or too long, too
thin or too thick, but by comparison with the body of the animal. Now,
the body, being required to have--whether in length, reckoning from the
point of the arm to the prominence of the buttock, or in height,
reckoning from the summit of the withers to the ground--two heads and a
half; whenever the head, by its geometrical length, shall give, in
length or in height, to the body measured more than two and a half times
its own length, it will be too short; and if it gives less, it will be
too long.
'In the case in which one of these faults exists there would be no
further question of establishing by its geometrical length the
proportions of the other parts. Give up this common measure, and measure
the height or the length of the body; divide the length or the height
into five equal portions; take, then, two of these divisions, divide
them into _primes_, _seconds_, and _points_, corresponding to the
divisions and subdivisions which you would have made of the head, and
you will have a common measure, such as the head would have given you if
it had been proportionate.'[39]
[39] Bourgelat, _loc. cit._, p. 135.
[Illustration: FIG. 106.--THE PROPORTIONS OF THE HORSE (AFTER
BOURGELAT).
_To face p. 265._]
We understand, up to a certain point, that Bourgelat may have been able
to give this advice which, generally speaking, is sufficiently
practical, since, in certain cases, he was able to pronounce that such a
head was too small or too large. But it is always mischievous, with
regard to the effect produced on the reader, to propose to him, in the
application of a rule, to suppress the foundation on which this rule is
established. Besides, even if all the measurements compared with the
two-fifths of the length of the body are proportionate with regard to
one another, the animal, in spite of this, since the head must be taken
into consideration, will, in a strict sense, be none the less
disproportioned.
The proportions given by Bourgelat are as follows[40] (Fig. 106):
[40] _Ibid._, p. 136, and onward.
1. =Three geometrical lengths of the head= give:
_The full height_ of the horse, reckoned from the forelock to the ground
on which he rests, provided that the head be well placed.[41]
[41] By 'the head being well placed,' Bourgelat means 'vertically
posed,' the outline of the forehead then coinciding with a
vertical line, which at the other end touches the anterior
portion of the nose.
2. =Two heads and a half= (B)[42] equals:
[42] The letters in parentheses relate to the corresponding measures
marked by the same letters on the third diagram of Fig. 106.
_The height of the body_ from the summit of the withers to the ground.
_The length of the same body_, those of the forehand and of the
hind-quarter taken as a whole from the point of the arm to the point of
the buttock inclusive.
3. =An entire head= (A) gives:
_The length of the forepart_ from the summit of the withers to the
termination of the neck.
_The height of the shoulders_ from the summit of the elbow to the top of
the withers.
_The thickness of the body_ from the middle of the belly to the middle
of the back.
_The width_ from one side to the other.
4. =A head measured from the top of the forelock to the commissure of
the lips= (C). This measurement slightly curtailed, unless the mouth is
very deeply cleft, equals:
_The length of the crupper_, taken from the superior point of the
anterior angle of the ilium to the tuberosity of the ischium, forming
the point of the buttock.
_The width of the crupper or of the haunches_, taken from the inferior
points of the angles of the ilia.
_The height of the crupper_, viewed laterally, taken from the summit of
the posterior angles of the ilia to the point of the patella, the leg
being in a state of rest.
_The lateral measure of the posterior limb_, from the point of the
patella, to the lateral and salient part of the ham, to the right of the
articulation of the tibia with the trochlea.
_The perpendicular height of the articulation above named_ above the
ground.
_The distance from the point of the arm_ to the angle formed by the
junction of the head and neck.
_The distance from the summit of the withers_ to the junction of the
neck with the thorax.
5. =Twice this last measure= (C)[43] gives almost:
[43] The proportions given in the two paragraphs 6 and 7 are, under
another form, the same as those pointed out in paragraph 2, with
this difference, that in this latter they are more clearly
expressed.
_The distance of the summit of the withers_ to the tip of the patella.
_The distance of the point of the elbow_ to the summit of the crupper or
the posterior angles of the ilia.
6. =Three times this measure, plus a half-width of the pastern, the
equivalent of two heads and a half=, will give:
_The height of the body_, taken from the top of the withers to the
ground.
_Its length_, taken from the point of the arm to the point of the
buttock inclusive.
7. =This same measure, plus the entire width of the pastern=, gives:
_The total length of the body_, taken accurately.
8. =Two-thirds the length of the head= (D) will equal:
_The width of the chest_, from the tip of one arm to that of the other,
from outside to outside.
_The horizontal measurement of the crupper_ taken between two verticals,
of which one forms a tangent to the buttock, and the other passes
through the summit of the crupper and touches the tip of the patella.
_The third of the length of the hind-quarter and of the body_ taken
together, as far as the vertical from the withers, touching the elbow.
_The anterior length of the hind-limb_, taken from the tuberosity of the
tibia to the fold of the ham.
9. =One-half of the length of the head= (E) is the same as:
_The horizontal distance from the tip of the arm_ to the vertical line
from the summit of the withers and touching the elbow.
_The width of the neck_, viewed laterally, taken from its insertion in
the trough of the jaw to the roots of the first hairs of the mane, on a
line which forms with the superior contour two equal angles.
10. =One-third of the entire length of the head= (F) gives:
_The height of its superior part_ from the summit of the forelock to a
line which passes through the most salient points of the orbits.
_The width of the head_ below the lower eyelids.
_The lateral width of the forearm_, taken from its anterior origin to
the point of the elbow.
11. =Two-thirds of this length=[44] (G) gives:
[44] That is to say, two-ninths of the whole length of the head.
_The distance of the point of the elbow_ above the plane of the lower
surface of the sternum.
_The depression of the back_ in relation to the summit of the withers.
_The lateral width of the posterior limbs near the hams._
_The space or distance of the forearms from one ars_[45] to the
opposite.
[45] We call the region where the superior and internal part of the
forearm is joined to the trunk the 'ars.' The space between the
ars of one side and the ars of the opposite side is called the
'inter-ars.'
12. =One-half of the third of the entire length of the head=[46] (H)
equals:
[46] That is to say, one-sixth of the total length of the head.
_The thickness of the forearm_, viewed from the front, and taken
horizontally from the ars to its external surface.
_The width of the crown of the fore-feet_ whether from one side to the
other, or from before backwards.
_The width of the crown of the hind-feet_, from one side to the other
only.
_The width of the posterior fetlocks_, taken from the front to the
origin of the spur.
_The width of the knee_ seen from the front. Note: this measure is a
little too large.
_The thickness of the ham._ Note: this measure is a little under the
mark.
13. =One-fourth of the third of the length of the head=[47] (I) gives:
[47] That is, one-twelfth of the length of the head.
_The thickness of the canon of the fore-limb_: that of the hind-quarter
is a little thicker.
14. =One-third of this same measure=[48] (K) equals:
[48] That is, a ninth of the length of the head.
_The thickness of the fore-limb close to the knee_ in its narrowest
part.
_The thickness of the posterior pasterns_, viewed laterally.
15. =The height from the elbow to the fold of the knee= (L) is the same
as:
_The height from this same fold to the earth._
_The height from the patella to the fold of the ham._
_The height from the fold of the ham to the crown._
16. =The sixth part of this measure= (M) gives:
_The width of the canon of the fore-limb_, viewed laterally, in the
middle of its length.
_The fetlock_, viewed from the front.
17. =The third of this same measure= (N) is very nearly equal to:
_The width of the ham_, from the fold to the point.
18. =A fourth of this measure= (O) gives:
_The width of the knee_, measured laterally.
_The length of the knee._
19. =The interval between the eyes from one great angle to the other=
(P) equals:
_The width of the hind-leg_, viewed laterally, from the cleft of the
buttocks to the inferior part of the tuberosity of the tibia.
20. =One-half of this interval between the eyes= (1/2 P) gives:
_The width of the posterior canon-bone_, viewed laterally.
_The width of the fetlock of the fore-limb_, from its anterior summit to
the root of the spur.
Finally, the difference of the height of the crupper with respect to the
summit of the withers.
It is certain that the multiplicity of these proportions, and above all
the exaggeration of details into which Bourgelat fell in indicating
certain of the measures which constitute the bases of some of them, may
repel the reader.
For this cause we desire to add to the preceding, and also because the
question which we are treating would be incomplete without it, the
results obtained and published by other more modern authors, and in
particular by Colonel Duhousset.[49]
[49] E. Duhousset, 'Le Cheval,' Paris, 1881.
This author, one of whose constant occupations is the measurement of the
different regions of the horse, has the incontestable merit of having
drawn attention to this question, and of having strained all his
energies in the propagation of the knowledge which until then was little
diffused. Among the proportions which he recommends, there are some
which are the result of his own observations; whilst others, which he
has verified and adopted, are the result of a judicious selection of
those given by Bourgelat, which we have just reproduced in the preceding
pages.
We join thereto also certain indications furnished by MM. A. Goubeaux
and G. Barrier,[50] distinguishing these latter by the initials (G. and
B.) of their authors (Fig. 107).
[50] Armand Goubeaux and Gustave Barrier, 'De l'exterieure du Cheval,'
Paris, 1882.
=The length of the head almost exactly equals=:
1. Depth from the back to the belly, N, O,[51] the thickness of the
body.[52]
[51] Look for the points indicated by these letters on Fig. 107, which
is related to the proportions which are here discussed.
[52] The proportion previously indicated by Bourgelat (see p. 265,
paragraph 3).
2. From the summit of the withers to the point of the arm, H, E.
3. From the superior fold of the stifle to the point of the ham, J', J.
4. From the point of the ham to the ground, J, K.
5. From the dorsal angle of the scapula to the point of the haunch, D,
D.
[Illustration: FIG. 107.--PROPORTIONS OF THE HORSE (AFTER COLONEL
DUHOUSSET).]
6. From the passage of the girth to the fetlock, M, I, or higher in
large horses and racers; to the middle of the fetlock or lower for small
ones and those of medium size.
7. From the superior fold of the stifle to the summit of the crupper in
those specimens whose coxo-femoral angle is very open. This distance is
always much less in others (G. and B.).[53]
[53] A proportion relative to the same region, and which at the outset
might appear similar, is pointed out by Bourgelat (see p. 266,
paragraph 4). But there exists a difference, for Bourgelat
compared the length of the head, measured from the forelock to
the commissure of the lips, and not that of the entire head, to
the distance which separates the summit of the rump and the tip
of the patella.
=Two and a half times the length of the head= gives:
1. The height of the withers, H, above the ground.[54]
[54] This proportion is that given by Bourgelat (see p. 265, paragraph
2).
2. The height of the summit of the crupper above the ground.[55]
[55] Consequently the withers and the crupper, being the same height,
are situated on the same horizontal plane. Bourgelat, on the
contrary, points out a difference of level in connection with
these regions. According to him the summit of the crupper is
situated below the horizontal plane passing the withers, and this
distance equals half of the space which separates the great angle
of one eye from that of the other (see p. 269, paragraph 20).
3. Very often the length of the body, from the point of the arm to that
of the buttock, although for a long time the type of Bourgelat had been
set aside as a conventional model, short and massive.[56]
[56] See p. 265, paragraph 2.
And M. Duhousset adds to this:
'The drawing that we offer, which has two heads and a half in height and
length, is that of a horse which we frequently meet with' (see Fig. 107;
see also p. 279, where we again consider this question of the length of
the body of the horse).
'The crupper, from the point of the haunch to that of the buttock, D, F,
is always less than that of the head. This difference varies from 5 to
10 centimetres. The width of the crupper, from one haunch to the other,
often very slightly exceeds its length.' MM. Goubeaux and Barrier add
that frequently it equals it.[57]
[57] If we refer to the proportions indicated by Bourgelat, we shall
find that the proportions relative to the crupper are also
indicated there (see p. 266, paragraph 4).
'The crupper, such as we have just defined it, D, H, may also be found
to a fair degree of exactness, as regards length, four times on the same
horse.'
1. From the point of the buttock to the inferior part of the stifle, F,
P.
2. The width of the neck, a little in front of the withers to a little
above the point of the arm, S, X.[58]
[58] MM. Goubeaux and Barrier replace this by the following: 'The
width of neck at its inferior attachment from its insertion into
the chest to the origin of the withers, S, X.' Bourgelat
discovered the same proportion (see p. 266, last line of
paragraph 4).
3. From this latter point to below the lower jaw, X, Q, when the head is
naturally placed parallel to the shoulders, E, H.[59]
[59] MM. Goubeaux and Barrier replace this by the following: 'From the
insertion of the neck into the chest to the lower border of the
lower jaw, X, Q, when the head is parallel to the shoulder.'
4. From the nape to the nostrils, _n, n'_.[60]
[60] MM. Goubeaux and Barrier add: 'Or to the commissure of the lips.'
It is thus, besides, that Bourgelat measured the head for
comparison with the crupper (see p. 266, paragraph 4).
The measure of =half of the head= also acts as a good guide for the
construction of the horse, when we know that it frequently applies to
many of the parts--to wit:
1. From the forehead above the eyes, perpendicular to the line which is
tangent to the lower jaw, P, Q.
2. Outline of the neck at the level of the base of the head, Q, L.[61]
[61] Proportion indicated by Bourgelat (see p. 267, paragraph 9).
3. From the crown of the fore-foot to below the knee, T, T'.
4. In the legs, from the base of the fetlock to that of the ham, U, V.
5. Finally, it is nearly of the length of the humerus from the point E
to the radius.[62]
[62] MM. Goubeaux and Barrier replace these by the following:
1. 'From the most prominent part of the lower jaw to the profile
of the forehead above the eye, P, Q (thickness of the head).
2. 'From the throat to the superior border of the neck behind the
nape, Q, L (attachment of the head).
3. 'From the inferior part of the knee to the crown, T, T'.
4. 'From the base of the ham to the fetlock, U, V.
5. 'Finally, from the point of the arm to the articulation of the
elbow (approximate length of the arm).'
PROPORTIONS OF THE HEAD OF THE HORSE[63]
[63] Extract from the work of MM. Goubeaux and Barrier on the exterior
of the horse. As before, the initials G. and B. of these authors
are added.
Although it is very difficult, says M. Duhousset, when we speak of
measurements taken on the living animal, to formulate other than
approximations, we believe we have determined with sufficient accuracy
the following results, which are the outcome of our numerous
observations. The head which we present is that of a horse which we have
frequently come across as a mean term between the highly bred and the
draught horse. Under this heading, it will not be devoid of interest to
accompany with dimensions the two drawings to which are consigned the
measurements in question.
=Head viewed in Profile= (Fig. 108).--Length, A, B, from the nape to the
margin of the lips, 0.60 metre.
Thickness, C, D, from the angle of the lower jaw to the anterior surface
(a half-head), 0.30 metre. This line passes through the middle of the
eye, taken perpendicularly, to the profile of the anterior surface. Many
common horses present it, especially the heavier draught horses; in
finely-bred subjects it is a little shorter (G. and B.).
Depth, I, H, of the neck in its narrowest part (a half-head), 0.30
metre. It is frequently greater; this is noticeable in all instances
where the superior parts of the neck are deficient in fineness. It is
this which we see in draught horses, and in those which become too
fleshy (G. and B.).
Distance, O, R, of the internal commissure of the eye from the superior
border of the commissure of the nostril (G. and B.) (a half-head), 0.30
metre. It is more considerable on the common head, and on that which is
too long.
Distance, A, O, from the nape to the internal angle of the eye, 0.22
metre. This distance is equivalent to the thickness of the head, P, Q,
taken perpendicularly from the profile of the anterior surface, and
passing at the level of the maxillary fissure and spine.
It is, again, equal to Q, O, from the internal angle of the eye to the
maxillary fissure; and to P, G, from the middle of the face to the
commissure of the lips (G. and B.).
The distance, P, E, from the middle of the face to the maxillary spine
is about the sixth of the total length of the head--0.10 metre.
[Illustration: FIG. 108.--PROPORTIONS OF THE HEAD OF THE HORSE, VIEWED
IN PROFILE (AFTER COLONEL DUHOUSSET).]
The line B, E, reckoned from the extremity of the lips to the maxillary
spine, is equal:
To E, F, from the maxillary spine to the external auditory meatus, to be
seen only on the skull;
To H, G, from the insertion of the neck in the trough to the commissure
of the lips (G. and B.);
To Q, R, from the maxillary fissure to the superior commissure of the
nostril (G. and B.);
To Q, B, from the fissure of the maxilla to the border of the lips (G.
and B.);
To O, D, from the internal angle of the eye to the angle of the lower
jaw, provided that the line C, D be in proportion (G. and B.).
[Illustration: FIG. 109.--THE SAME DESIGN AS THAT OF FIG. 108, ON WHICH
WE HAVE INDICATED, BY SIMILAR LINES, THE PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDING
MEASUREMENTS.
Half the length of the head, and the dimensions which equal it; distance
which separate the nape from the internal angle of the eye, and the
dimensions which equal it; distance which separates the internal angle
of the eye from the border of the lips, and the dimensions which equal
it.[64]]
[64] It is thus that in our teaching, but by means of lines of
different colours, we present the proportions reproduced in Fig.
108. Experience has demonstrated to us that this replacement of
letters by conventional lines renders the proportions more easily
appreciable, and that these lines, striking the eye more
forcibly, then impress themselves better on the memory. Fig. 111
bears the same relation to Fig. 110.
Finally, very frequently to O, H, from the internal angle of the eye to
the insertion of the throat into the maxillary trough (G. and B.).
An equality still more frequent is that which exists between the
distances:
O, B, from the internal angle of the eye to the margin of the lips;
A, H, from the nape to the insertion of the throat into the maxillary
trough;
And H, B, from this latter point to the margins of the lips.
[Illustration: FIG. 110.--PROPORTIONS OF THE HEAD OF THE HORSE, SEEN
FROM THE FRONT (AFTER COLONEL DUHOUSSET).]
=The Head, Front View= (Fig. 110).--If, to continue our examination,
adds M. Duhousset, we regard the head from the front, we find its
greatest width at A, B, the extreme points of the orbital arches.
This width is 22 centimetres.
It is again equal to:
A, C, from one arch to the nape;
A, D, from one arch to the middle of the face.
D, E, from the middle of the face to the margin of the lips.
From the auditory canal, G, to the maxillary spine, F, is the same
distance as from this point to the margins of the lips, E, or, better,
to the end of the teeth.
[Illustration: FIG. 111.--THE SAME FIGURE AS FIG. 110, ON WHICH WE HAVE
MARKED BY SIMILAR LINES THE PRINCIPAL MEASUREMENTS WHICH CORRESPOND
THERETO.
Distance which separates one of the orbital arches from that of the
opposite side, and the dimensions which equal it; distance which
separates the auditory meatus from the maxillary spine, and the
dimensions which equal it; distance which separates one maxillary spine
from that of the opposite side, and the dimensions which equal it;
distance which separates the lip of one side from that of the opposite,
and the dimensions which equal it.[65]]
[65] See the note relative to Fig. 109.
The line G, C, from the auditory meatus to the nape, is equal to the
sixth of the head, 10 centimetres; the line A, G, from the orbital arch
to the auditory meatus, is a little longer, and measures 12
centimetres.
The distance F, I, comprised between the maxillary spines, is 18
centimetres.
It is equal to:
O, O, the distance between the internal angles of the eyes (G. and B.);
F, R, the distance from the maxillary spine to the superior commissure
of the corresponding nostril (G. and. B.);
F, P, from the maxillary spine to the _salt-cellar_.[66]
[66] We designate under the name _salt-cellar_ a depression situated
external to the frontal region and above the eye.
From the nape to the internal angle of the eye, C, O, is the same
distance as from this latter point to the commissure of the lips, O, T;
and from the maxillary spine to the upper lip F, S (G. and B.).
The distance apart, T, T, of the two commissures of the lips gives, very
nearly, the distance from the superior border of the orbital arch to the
base of the ear or the auditory meatus. In the state of rest, the outer
limit of the separation of the nostrils does not exceed the width of the
knee;[67] we frequently find the same distance intercepted above the
nape by the tranquil ears. In the figure (Fig. 110) we have
intentionally represented them directed in a different plane, in order
to show that when the pinna is turned backward, it none the less
preserves the contour of bracket form, more or less pronounced according
to the breeding of the subject, and characterizing in repose the
interior curves of the ear.
[67] We remind our readers that the name 'knee' is given by
veterinarians to the region occupied by the carpus.
The extreme limit of the lips, M, N, but very slightly exceeds that of
the nostrils; on many heads of harmonious proportions this distance is
found to be the half of A, B.
In order not to interrupt the course of the preceding exposition, we
decided to withhold till afterwards some reflections which have been
suggested to us by certain of the proportions which are there indicated.
The proportions in question are important--we may even say that they are
fundamental, for they have for object the relation which exists between
the length of the head, the height of the body, and the length of the
latter.
We have already seen that, according to Bourgelat, the length of the
head is contained two and a half times in the length of the body, from
the point of the arm to the point of the buttock; and, also, two and a
half times in the height measured from the apex of the withers to the
ground (see p. 265). We saw afterwards that M. Duhousset, having adopted
these proportions, pointed out, further, that the same dimension was
again found equally to exist from the summit of the crupper to the
ground--a height which Bourgelat considered as being of less extent.
There results, then, from the latter proportions, which we have just
recalled, this interesting fact: that they simplify very much, from the
point of view of design, the placing in position of the horse, on the
condition always that this latter be always viewed directly on one of
its lateral aspects.
[Illustration: FIG. 112.--HORSE OF WHICH THE LENGTH CONTAINS MORE THAN
TWO AND A HALF TIMES THAT OF THE HEAD, AND OF WHICH THIS DIMENSION (A,
B) EXCEEDS THE HEIGHT.]
Indeed, in this case, if we except the neck and the head, the body,
inasmuch as its height and its length are equal, may be inscribed in a
square, of which one of the sides corresponds to the withers and to the
summit of the crupper, two of the other sides to the point of the arm
and to that of the buttock the fourth being represented by the ground.
This is simple, but this simplicity even has its inconveniences.
It follows that this proportion, thus expressed, seems to exclude from
every artistic representation certain categories of horses, which upon
the whole might be regarded as beautiful, and the existence of which in
any case it would be a pity not to indicate.
[Illustration: FIG. 113.--HORSE OF WHICH THE LENGTH CONTAINS MORE THAN
TWO AND A HALF TIMES THAT OF THE HEAD, AND OF WHICH THIS DIMENSION (A,
B) EXCEEDS THE HEIGHT.]
Let us examine at the outset that which is relative to the length of the
body, equal to two and a half times the length of the head. This
proportion is sometimes met with, and therefore may be considered exact;
but it is necessary to add that its existence is not discoverable in the
majority of cases. That for some authors it constitutes a perfect model
we will not gainsay, but it is our impression that, when it exists, the
head appears a little large, or, more exactly, the body a little short.
Without attaining exactly to three times the length of the head, as some
authors (Saint-Bel, Vallon) have announced, the body of the horse,
nevertheless, measured as is stated above, frequently contains it more
than two and a half times. We give in support of this some outline
reproductions, executed after photographs (Figs. 112, 113, 114).
There still remains the question regarding the equality of the height
and of the length of the body of the horse.
This equality, after the proportions previously indicated, would seem
bound to appear in all the cases observed. Now, if we measure the
examples reproduced in Figs. 112, 113, and 114, we shall see that
sometimes the two dimensions are unequal, the height being greater than
the length, or inversely.
[Illustration: FIG. 114.--HORSE OF WHICH THE LENGTH CONTAINS MORE THAN
TWO AND A HALF TIMES THAT OF THE HEAD, AND OF WHICH THIS DIMENSION (A,
B) IS INFERIOR TO THE HEIGHT.]
It is the same, if we examine a certain number of specimens; we are able
to determine that the proportion chosen in preference by authors is not
exactly that which is oftenest met with. It will, very probably, be
objected that it is so for the most beautiful types, and that the
indifferent ones are generally the more numerous. The essential thing
would be to know, above all, if the type of two heads and a half of
length and of height is really the only beautiful one. However that may
be, of the fifty African horses measured by M. Duhousset, only fourteen
possessed the equality indicated; twenty-six were less long than high,
and ten more long than high.[68]
[68] E. Duhousset, 'The Horse,' Paris, 1881.