Untitled

Circus and Nature in Late Georgian England
contrasted the vicious attacks sometimes made by proletarians on the prized horses
of the rich, as he strove to educate the people in the importance of physical fitness
and martial skills. 34 “When mounted on his beautiful grey, in the centre [of the
ring],” eulogized the Morning Post in 1807, “the veteran ASTLEY, apparently in
the flower of his age, still conserves the extraordinary management of the horse . . .
What a noble example to the heads of families, civil and military, and to the rising
generation in general, is to be witnessed every evening!” 35 And as with cars today,
there was a horse for almost every status and occupation, and the circus displayed
a full range, from “high-bred racers,” through sturdier Hunters, horses “for
Ladies,” “Forest Racers” for children (“only 39 ins high”), to the broad-backed
Hanoverian Creams used in the ring. 36
Although the performing arts have often served as an avenue of social opportunity,
equestrianism also helped to reinforce the norms of class, race, and gender.
The essential horse required the quintessential man: in the early years circus
horsemanship was headlined as “manly” (and hence English) in reaction to the
worrying influence of French foppishness. Astley’s own “System of Equestrian
Education,” on which he published a highly successful manual in the early
nineteenth century, was presented as a plain and sensible home-grown rival to the
previously dominant and supposedly simpering French and Neapolitan schools of
horse-riding. 37 Horsemanship was the ultimate test of integrity, so for the early
riding master Dingley in 1766, the feats of a female rider were proof that “The
fair sex were by no means inferior to the male, either in Courage or Ability.” 38
Despite the fact that horsemanship was held to be a “science” and therefore
problematic for women, feats by them, including the spouses of Philip Astley and
his rival Charles Hughes, were presented without particular qualification in the
early 1770s. While the spotlight was on masculinity, exceptional women could use
such activities to break free of tradition: there were swordswomen, female
pugilists, and occasional jockeys into the Napoleonic period. During the nineteenth
century, however, the need to define masculinity seems to have given way to a
greater anxiety about the display of femininity, with commentaries on female
performers usually stressing their prettiness, elegance and desirability to men. In
1818, a handbill for circus riding lessons (now segregated by sex) assured readers
that “The most timid Lady need not be under the least Apprehension in Learning
this most useful and necessary Art .” 39
For ethnographic demonstrations, one could look at an increasing range of
imported styles of riding during the nineteenth century; not only the classical
Haute Ecole and Viennese, but also more stirring choices: “The kind of companionship
and attachment between Greeks, Arabs, and their Horses,” claimed a bill
for Ducrow during the period of Ottoman war in 1826, “furnish[es] full scope for
the managed Horses.” 40 On the stage, a horse conferred worthiness on a foreign
character, whether Cossack ally or Saracen foe, whereas the irredeemable savage
53