Horses and Mules in the Civil War: A Complete History with a Roster of More Than 700 War Horses

CMWinkler

Colonel
Retired Moderator
Joined
Oct 17, 2012
Location
Middle Tennessee
51vZpPBtpwL._SL160_.jpg


Horses and Mules in the Civil War: A Complete History with a Roster of More Than 700 War Horses
, by Gene C. Armistead

Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2013. Pp. viii, 248. Illus., appends., notes., biblio., index. $49.95 paper. ISBN: 0786473630.



The most forgotten participants – and victims – of the Civil War

Although horses and mules have played major roles in warfare from the dimmest past to the most recent conflicts, their importance has most often been taken for granted. In this look at the equine participants in the Civil War, sometime Marine and independent scholar Armistead reminds us that not only did more equines serve in the Civil War armies than humans, but they suffered heavier casualties as well, more than a million perishing from wounds, hunger, disease, or exhaustion.

Armistead addresses the ways in which horses and mules were procured by both armies. This includes “recruiting” standards, training, and “horseflesh” management, which required an extensive infrastructure of remount depots, animal hospitals, transportation facilities, and more, which became particularly sophisticated on the Union side. Armistead discusses the problems related to caring for the animals under wartime conditions, and losses in battle or to the hazards of the service; although casualty rates in action were high (a horse offers a target about five times larger than does a man), more horses and mules died of exhaustion and disease than from shot and shell.

Armistead include several short accounts of particular horses or mules in action, including a chapter on the Union’s curiously successful “mule brigade.” Two chapters deal with the end of the war and postwar memorialization and contemporary naming customs. The final chapter is a roster of known horses, often with extensive commentary, of particular value to biographers as most of the animals about which something is known were generals’ mounts. There are also several useful appendices.

This is a very interesting and useful work for anyone with an interest in the Civil War or with the rather neglected subject the management of a nation's "horsepower" in war.

Note: Horses and Mules in the Civil War is also available as an e-book, ISBN 978-1-4766-0237-0.

---///--- Reviewer: A. A. Nofi, Review Editor
 
I have only just watched The Colt which I thoroughly enjoyed . Does anyone know if this film was based on Fact or Fiction ?
 
I have only just watched The Colt which I thoroughly enjoyed . Does anyone know if this film was based on Fact or Fiction ?

I believe it was based on a short story but don't know if that story was based on something true! Didn't Bob Peck, the Australian hunter from Jurassic Park, play the Confederate artillery captain? He was good.
 
Interesting, thanks. I knew the armies used - and used up - large numbers of animals, but I hadn't realized there were more of them than soldiers.
Same here. It's sure not intuitively obvious. To tell the truth, it sounds so off-base that I guess I would need to read the book and see the documentation to be convinced.

But then again, since a horse does offer 5x as big a target, it makes sense that horses would get hit more often. And unlike with human wounded, most times no effort would be made to doctor and save the horse; it would probably just be shot and put out of its misery. If every dead horse was replaced by a new one, I suppose that could add up to a tremendous number of horses.
 
Same here. It's sure not intuitively obvious. To tell the truth, it sounds so off-base that I guess I would need to read the book and see the documentation to be convinced.

But then again, since a horse does offer 5x as big a target, it makes sense that horses would get hit more often. And unlike with human wounded, most times no effort would be made to doctor and save the horse; it would probably just be shot and put out of its misery. If every dead horse was replaced by a new one, I suppose that could add up to a tremendous number of horses.

Good points, also you couldn't amputate a damaged limb on a horse the way you can on a human. Still I think the majority of animals were done in by overwork or disease.
 
Back
Top