Cavalry Protocol

[FarawayFriend]

Thank you, Mike and Mr. Wittenberg, again I have learned a lot!
And @chellers the question of the now useless saddles had occured to me also. Thanks for asking the question and again thanks @Eric Wittenberg for the information. I hope they did not have to carry the heavy saddles too far!

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

The 1st NY Dragoons will disagree with that

The Regular Army Dragoon regiments (1st & 2nd US Dragoons) were re-designated as cavalry by the Act of August 3, 1861.

So technically, there were Dragoons during the Civil War.

That is true. Although the New York Dragoons joined the Reserve Brigade and operated as any other Union cavalry regiment.

 

[chellers]

Sometimes, the members of Company Q carried them. Or they were put in wagons. Seldom were they abandoned.

Thank you, sir.

 

[War Horse]

You might find this very old piece on my blog interesting. It discusses the elimination of the various categories of mounted service in the U.S. Army in 1861.

http://civilwarcavalry.com/?page_id=11

What a really nice history of Cavalry and its use during the civil war. Stuart's father in-law Phillip Saint George Cooke wrote the book!, Little Mac nor Pope had a clue how to utilize it. A Dragoon prior to the reorganization was designed to never fight mounted, just the opposite of what I though. Very informative.

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

What a really nice history of Cavalry and its use during the civil war. Stuart's father in-law Phillip Saint George Cooke wrote the book!, Little Mac nor Pope had a clue how to utilize it. A Dragoon prior to the reorganization was designed to never fight mounted, just the opposite of what I though. Very informative.

Actually, I have to disagree with you about Pope. Of all of the Union army commanders, he probably understood its use best. He misused it, but he did understand it. After all, the first volunteer brigades were formed under his command.

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

What a really nice history of Cavalry and its use during the civil war. Stuart's father in-law Phillip Saint George Cooke wrote the book!, Little Mac nor Pope had a clue how to utilize it. A Dragoon prior to the reorganization was designed to never fight mounted, just the opposite of what I though. Very informative.

You might enjoy this one, too. This was originally written for and published in the Civil War Trust's magazine, Hallowed Ground, and now appears on the Trust's website. I wrote this in about three hours and without a single note. After all of those years of living with a subject, you get to know it a little bit.

http://www.civilwar.org/battlefield...rg-history-articles/gettysburgwittenberg.html

 

[War Horse]

Actually, I have to disagree with you about Pope. Of all of the Union army commanders, he probably understood its use best. He misused it, but he did understand it. After all, the first volunteer brigades were formed under his command.

Batting 1000 here, I better just read

 

[War Horse]

You might enjoy this one, too. This was originally written for and published in the Civil War Trust's magazine, Hallowed Ground, and now appears on the Trust's website. I wrote this in about three hours and without a single note. After all of those years of living with a subject, you get to know it a little bit.

http://www.civilwar.org/battlefield...rg-history-articles/gettysburgwittenberg.html

You completed this in only 3 hours completely from memory? Wow.

Lt. Marcellus Jones of the 8th Illinois Cavalry borrowed a carbine, rested it on a fence post, and squeezed off a shot that hit nothing. However, the sound of the weapon sent up the alarm, and the Confederates halted and deployed skirmishers.

I don't believe I've read this before. What was the purpose of this shot. Did Marcellus want to alert the Rebels for some reason?

 

[E_just_E]

Did Marcellus want to alert the Rebels for some reason?

Story goes that he fired at a Confederate officer on a light color (white or grey) horse and he missed.

 

[DixieRifles]

I think I have read several examples of soldiers giving up their mount to an higher ranking officer. This occurred not only in Cavalry but for mounted officers of any command.

In Jordan and Pryor's book, it quotes Dr. Cowan's account of General Forrest having 2 mounts killed within just a few minutes. After the second one fell, he said King Phillip was brought forward. The first mount was struck my 5 balls. The second didn't last 150 yards. Even King Phillip took a round in the neck. That makes me think that a large cavarly force would have a few extra mounts in the rear in reserve. I have read that General Forrest had 3 horses shot from under him at the Battle of Fort Pillow. But other sources say there were only 2. I can't recall the source, but it resolved this by saying Forrest had two killed and when he went to mount the third one it was too skiddish or something so he passed on it. The point: if the General needs a horse, the General gets a horse.

Also, as previously stated, a cavarly unit usually operated as mounted infantry. These mounted infantry traveled long distances and covered mor ground than infantry but they did not always ride at a gallop like John Wayne. They probably had a couple of wagons follow along to carry extra ammo, food and to pick up the wounded. It is quite conceiveable that the wagon and artillery train would include a few extra horses. The prime objective of a cavalry raid---large or small---was to strike the enemy and the secondary object was to capture arms, supplies, wagons and of course horses. After the first engagment, there would be riderless horses scattering in different directions. These could be collected to add to their reserves and plunder.

That is my opinion, anyway.

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

You completed this in only 3 hours completely from memory? Wow.

Lt. Marcellus Jones of the 8th Illinois Cavalry borrowed a carbine, rested it on a fence post, and squeezed off a shot that hit nothing. However, the sound of the weapon sent up the alarm, and the Confederates halted and deployed skirmishers.

I don't believe I've read this before. What was the purpose of this shot. Did Marcellus want to alert the Rebels for some reason?

Read my Buford book, Mike. It will tell you everything you could possibly want to know about this subject.

The purpose was to send out an alert that the enemy were coming. It took Heth two hours to deploy from column of march into line of battle. That single shot that hit nothing bought two hours' time.

Yep, sure did. Like I said, if you live with something as long as I have lived with Gettysburg cavalry operations, you would be able to do the same thing.

 

[4065921]

May I ask a bloody beginner's question? Did they really become infantry? If so , what is then "dismounted cavalry"?
What is the difference?
Sorry for my ignorance ...

One of the best examples of the effective use of dismounted cavalry would be Buford at Gettysburg on day 1 of the battle.

 

[E_just_E]

One of the best examples of the effective use of dismounted cavalry would be Buford at Gettysburg on day 1 of the battle.

That's pretty debatable. I am not sure that things would have not been better for the Union, had Buford gone back to Meade and warn him about the position of the Confederates, instead of camping out at Gettysburg overnight, and decided to play Infantry and start the battle. Yes the Union won, but suffered 35,000 casualties, including the death of the most talented General on the Eastern Theater (Reynolds) and the severe disablement of another talented General (Hancock) who was practically useless for the rest of the war. Also, to replace those 35,000, the 2 drafts were held in NYC that July, and you know what happened then. We'll never going to know how things would had turned had Buford done differently, but his actions are not without scrutiny...

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

That's pretty debatable. I am not sure that things would have not been better for the Union, had Buford gone back to Meade and warn him about the position of the Confederates, instead of camping out at Gettysburg overnight, and decided to play Infantry and start the battle. Yes the Union won, but suffered 35,000 casualties, including the death of the most talented General on the Eastern Theater (Reynolds) and the severe disablement of another talented General (Hancock) who was practically useless for the rest of the war. Also, to replace those 35,000, the 2 drafts were held in NYC that July, and you know what happened then. We'll never going to know how things would had turned had Buford done differently, but his actions are not without scrutiny...

But then we wouldn't have Dirty Dan Sickles to amuse ourselves with.

 

[4065921]

That's pretty debatable.

Agreed, the battle and whether or nor it should have been fought and perhaps where and how, is debatable. However, Buford's use of his mounted troops as dismounted infantry to delay the Confederate advance and allow Union Infantry time to arrive on field is relative to this thread.

 

[4065921]

But then we wouldn't have Dirty Dan Sickles to amuse ourselves with.

Poor Dan, he gets dragged through the mud (no pun intended), even on threads that have nothing to do him

 

[4065921]

What a really nice history of Cavalry and its use during the civil war. Stuart's father in-law Phillip Saint George Cooke wrote the book!, Little Mac nor Pope had a clue how to utilize it. A Dragoon prior to the reorganization was designed to never fight mounted, just the opposite of what I though. Very informative.

Someone who does not get enough credit for Union Cavalry success is General Joseph Hooker. It was Hooker who dismantled Burnside's grand divisions and returned the army to the corps system and in doing so created a corps composed entirely of mounted units. He liberated the Cavalry troops from their primary duties as divisional couriers, bodyguards, picket duty and escorts for wagon trains. It was Hooker instituted an organizational restructuring in the Federal Army that created the Union Cavalry Corps under Sheridan which, after a time, could challenge Confederate Cavalry on the field.

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

Someone who does not get enough credit for Union Cavalry success is General Joseph Hooker. It was Hooker who dismantled Burnside's grand divisions and returned the army to the corps system and in doing so created a corps composed entirely of mounted units. He liberated the Cavalry troops from their primary duties as divisional couriers, bodyguards, picket duty and escorts for wagon trains. It was Hooker instituted an organizational restructuring in the Federal Army that created the Union Cavalry Corps under Sheridan which, after a time, could challenge Confederate Cavalry on the field.

That is absolutely the case. I often say that the order establishing the Cavalry Corps in February 1863 was the single best order given by Hooker during his tenure as commander of the Army of the Potomac.