The Count Toptani Story

Like Jack Hance, Toptani became frustrated by riders who, whatever their talent, could not realise the potential that he knew they possessed. Also like Hance, he focused on the saddle, taking the best he had to Senor Perez, 'seventh in a line of famous saddlers'. Perez was affronted by the suggestion that anything could be wrong with one of his beautifully crafted saddles but agreed to accompany Toptani, with the saddle, to his riding club, where the Count had erected a jumping course of some 30 obstacles at a height of 1·5 m (5 ft).

Saddling his best jumper, Toptani invited Perez to ride the course on the saddle he had made. That, of course, was impossible, for Perez had only rarely been in touching distance of a horse and admitted so. It was, he declared, not his fault since he only built the saddle on the tree provided by his friend Senor Lopez, the tree-maker. Forthwith, Toptani took the horse, the saddle and the saddler to the tree-maker who, Toptani reported, was so incensed that he reached for the knife he carried in his belt, telling Toptani to 'Go and have a few riding lessons'. When it was suggested that he should demonstrate by riding the horse over a few fences he, too, admitted that in all his life he had never sat on a horse. (When I told this story to a friend, this was his comment: 'If it wasn't for the names you could be talking about Walsall!')

Toptani, together with Senores Perez and Lopez, got down to building a saddle designed specifically for the purpose of competitive riding - or, indeed, for just riding. To do so Toptani returned to the saddles of the traditional horse-peoples, those that came out of Turkey, Mongolia and Arabia - the old steppe patterns, in fact. He built his saddle with a spring tree to give resilience in the seat, and he confirms that the first practical trees of this sort to find general acceptance were those used by Pariani in saddles built to conform with Caprilli's il sistema early on in the twentieth century.

When he came to Britain, the saddle he found nearest to his South American prototype was the Central-Position Distas and, once more, this time in conjunction with Holmes and Gibson, and with the co-operation of George Parker as the distributor, he set about the design of the saddle that was to bear his name and influence succeeding generations of British horsemen.

In the conventional 'English' hunting saddle, the basis for so many of the European patterns, the bars had been too far forward in relation to the shape of the seat, which was flat and in which the dip, such as it was, placed the rider towards the cantle, behind the movement and the centre of balance, if not behind the very centre of movement itself.

The dip-seat of the Toptani saddle, designed, it must be remembered, specifically for jumping, positioned the rider much further forward and as close to the centre of balance as possible, while the panel was built to provide strong support in front of the knee for a rider using a shortened jumping-length leather. To achieve that objective, however, it was necessary to think again about the critical positioning of the bar. In the conventional saddle the head, or fore-arch, was fitted vertically in relation to the body of the tree. Had that feature been retained in the Toptani saddle, with its dipped seat and forward-swept panels, the bar, instead of being too far forward, as in the hunting saddle, would have been just the opposite, i.e. it would have been too far back and as a result the rider would 

have been quite unable to put his weight forward and over the stirrup iron while maintaining his anchoring leg position. The same would have applied if the head was of the cut-back variety, a device employed to give a greater range of fitting in respect of high wither formations.

The problem, after all those years when the bar had been placed too far to the front, was now, paradoxically, how to position it even further forward. The solution was to slope the head so that it joined the tree at an angle of 45 degrees. By doing this, the points were brought forward and with them the setting of the stirrup bar itself. Additionally, the sloped head was just as effective in relation to the fitting as the cut-back head, which, whatever its advantages, represents a weaker structure in the engineering sense.

The panel itself was built so as to present minimal bulk between the rider and his horse, and the narrowing of the tree at its waist, a line followed by the panel, contributed very materially to that end. Moreover, the saddle fitted very snugly ('as a mould does to the cast that is taken from it'), allowing the rider to sit close without being raised up off the back where his contact with the horse would be lessened.

A saddle allowing this sort of close contact lowered the rider's centre of gravity, therefore increasing the strength of the base. (Conversely, a heavily stuffed panel, broad at its waist and spreading the thighs, raises the rider away from the back, lifting the centre of gravity and reducing the strength of the base.)

To fulfil the principle of close contact more completely, Toptani had both the sweat flap and the nap itself made from leather of a very light substance (thickness). English saddles employed hard-wearing, heavy flap leather. It would last for upwards of 60 years, but only began to become supple during the lifetime of its third generation of owners. Durability of materials was a tenet of the saddler's faith, to be observed conscientiously but without reference to design and purpose, and the riding public expected, quite irrationally, a lifetime of service from their saddles, indeed, they wanted more than that, expecting to hand down a saddle from father to son to grandson.

Durability was not a priority in a precision instrument like Toptani's saddle, although it wore well enough and tree failures, under normal conditions, were unknown. In time, the thin naps would show signs of wear and would rumple, but of what consequence was that? A new pair were easily enough fitted without in any way altering the design or detracting from the saddle's efficiency.

The springs of tempered steel, set longitudinally on the tree from head to cantle, added to the rider's comfort, giving a soft, resilient seat but, additionally, they increased the horse's comfort too, as they gave slightly to the movement of the back. (Only in later years did the spring tree create problems when corners were cut in cheaper copies. Seats were then allowed to take on an unnecessarily exaggerated dip and the steel 'springs' used were often of insufficient strength. As a result, the rider's weight was concentrated over an area so small as to produce pressure points midway down the back on either side.) The Toptani saddle, like Caprilli's il sistema, to which it gave a renewed impetus, may not have been accepted universally but it altered forever the concept of saddle design and construction, established a principle (alas, not yet completely understood by either manufacturers or riders) and was instrumental in the demise of the conventional English saddle - in fact, it put an end to it.

 Of far greater import was the effect on the standard of British competitive riding, at both national and international levels, of a saddle that was a clear reflection of all the principles of forward riding over fences and in which it was possible to vindicate the teaching inherent in the Caprilli system.

Writing in the revised edition of Modern Showjumping in 1972, Toptani was able to state, with unusual modesty: '... I do now believe that the modern saddle I introduced to England, and which served as a pattern for many others, was partly instrumental in the great equestrian post-war successes of the British teams in international jumping events, and so were the modern methods as expounded in this book'. In hindsight, and having regard to the structure of the much smaller horse world of the time, there was justification for his claim.

Quite certainly, the Toptani was copied extensively by other makers and within a very short time a large part of the Walsall production was given over to saddles incorporating, more or less, the principles involved in its construction. Unhappily, as the manufacturers, almost to a man, were unable to appreciate those principles and had most certainly never thought of reading the book in which they were so clearly expounded, a lot of bad imitations came on the market.

In the light of developments in Walsall and in Europe over the past 20 years, and in particular within the last decade, it is worth recalling, in the interests of perspective, Toptani's assessments of the general saddle patterns with which he was familiar when he visited Britain in 1972.

In the 1954 publication of Modern Showjumping (then carrying the byline 'The South American Method'), he had effectively demolished the 'English'-pattern saddle while admitting that in terms of workmanship those made in England were 'the very finest in the world'. He administered the final coup degrace in one devastating sentence: 'Hang your old saddles on the walls of your home as antiques - they might serve as a substitute for etchings.'

He was no more complimentary about the French saddles of the Danloux pattern, which unlike the English-made saddles, did not even have the saving grace of being well made.

In the 1972 revision Toptani had no need to discuss the 'English' saddle as it no longer existed, but he included critical commentaries on the French, German and Italian products.

About the French saddle, derived from Colonel Danloux's pattern, he remarked that many of the current patterns (i.e. of early 1970s vintage) would have made that 'excellent officer and successful horseman turn in his grave'. He went on to condemn 'the worst sort of French saddles' as having 'every single defect of all the other saddles made in Europe in earlier days and none of their very few good qualities'.

Toptani's criticism, which he acknowledged as being harsh, was based on the following shortcomings:

1. Weight- about 11kg(25 lb);

2. Thick, stiff leather of poor quality;

3. Too broad between the rider's legs - 25 cm (10 in) wide in the waist as opposed to Toptani's 10 cm (4 in);

4. A weak front arch that spread after very little use, placing the rider in advance of the movement and thus ovenueight-ing the forehand,

5. Panels far too heavily stuffed, particularly at the cantle. As a result the rider sat above his horse rather than in contact,and the saddle's balance was seriously affected.

 The criticism was certainly harsh, but it was no more severe than the product deserved.

Twenty years later some French saddles have improved, but they are still open to criticism, particularly on account of the trees used and the quality of the components.

The old-type German saddles received similarly short shrift (as did the style of the German riders of the period), but the modern patterns fared much better even though they employed then, as now, the largely irrational cut-back head. However, they were no longer heavy and were much narrower at the twist, while using soft, light leathers.

In 1972, Toptani did not think the German saddle either 'helpful' or 'entirely suitable' for jumping because of the still apparent dressage influence. He attributed the German jumping successes to 'the outstanding quality of the superb German horses', which he regarded as being 'the finest types in the world for jumping'.

What is perhaps more relevant to the German saddle of the 11)80s and IL)90s is this comment: ‘Surprisingly, the Germans, a conservative people, have a strong inclination towards fancy innovations and some of their predicts are so decorative that they look almost like a German version of the fancy Mexican parade saddles. But, perhaps, that is the influence of the American market.’

The Italian saddles, which without doubt drew largely on the design features of the Toptani, met, understandably, with more approval.

The Toptani is still made in Britain to this day and many would argue that it remains supreme as a jumping saddle. What has been lost in the flood of German pattern saddles that have dominated the market in recent years is the principle relative to the head and the position of the stirrup bar, which Toptani demonstrated so clearly.

Reproduced by permission of the author Elwyn Hartley Edwards from his superb book ‘The Saddle’pp.49-58

Published by J.A. Allen & Co. Ltd

London SW1 0EL

Great Britain

ISBN 0-85131-526-7