U.S Colored Cavalry armed with inadequate weaponry?

[RgtQmEllis]

I'm currently looking into the Saltville & Simpsonville massacres. During both engagement the 5th United States Colored Cavalry were said to be armed with P53 Rifle-muskets, which are almost impossible to load on horseback. Was the armament of these cavalrymen mostly influenced by thier race/unit, or were other U.S cavalry regiments raised in the same region given similar weapons?

 

[FedericoFCavada]

I'm currently looking into the Saltville & Simpsonville massacres. During both engagement the 5th United States Colored Cavalry were said to be armed with P53 Rifle-muskets, which are almost impossible to load on horseback. Was the armament of these cavalrymen mostly influenced by thier race/unit, or were other U.S cavalry regiments raised in the same region given similar weapons?

Certainly the majority of Union cavalry troopers at least had breech-loading single-shot carbines. A few were armed with repeaters like the 7-shot Spencer. I'm not sure if loading on horseback was all that typical, frankly? I think most cavalry used the horse for mobility, and every now and then for charges or hot pursuit of the enemy, but often fought dismounted like Dragoons.

In the CSA, cavalry sometimes had their horses taken away/ requisitioned, and the units fought as infantry.
Loading an Enfield P53 rifle musket with the U.S. type cartridge would be a real chore while mounted. On foot, it would be no different from what the infantry did.

I do know that the former 1st Mississippi (U.S.) cavalry, later the 3rd U.S. Colored Cavalry used the Model 1855 Colt Root revolving rifle, which was mighty unpopular with Berdan's Sharps Shooters (who wanted Sharps, after all), but was the equivalent of what lots of Iowa cavalry carried on Grierson's Raid, and was used to telling effect by the 21st OVI at Chickamauga.

There have been past threads on the armament of the USCT that might be of interest, or germane to your topic, although I think these were mostly on the "3rd class" and "2nd class" weapons for infantry. I think that by the later parts of the war most USCT carried comparable weapons to any other Federal outfit.

https://history.army.mil/html/books/030/30-24/cmh_pub_30-24.pdf

 

[FedericoFCavada]

On p. 119 above: "The question of inferior equipment rankled the U.S. Colored Troops throughout the war. In Louisiana, as in the Department of the South, the reason for such deficiencies lay in long supply lines, slow communications, and haste in raising new black regiments as much as it did in the malice of individual staff officers who had low expectations of black soldiers' abilities and believed that any equipment was good enough for troops who were unlikely ever to meet an enemy."

P. 337 indicates that news of the Fort Pillow massacre elicited concerns that USCT get efficient arms in good working order.

 

[thomas aagaard]

I'm currently looking into the Saltville & Simpsonville massacres. During both engagement the 5th United States Colored Cavalry were said to be armed with P53 Rifle-muskets, which are almost impossible to load on horseback. Was the armament of these cavalrymen mostly influenced by thier race/unit, or were other U.S cavalry regiments raised in the same region given similar weapons?

Traditionally a (european) cavalryman would have:
A carbine for dismounted skirmishing. (but can if needed be used mounted)
1-2 pistoles for mounted skirmishing (and can be used against an infantry square at point blank range)
A saber that is used for mounted combat, both during mounted skirmishing and on the actual battlefield.

So the main issue with a full length musket is not that the are hard to load mounted, since they are mainly carried for dismounted work,
But that they are cumbersome. And plenty of csa cavalry units carried full length riflemuskets.

In this case, and Iam just guessing, I would think that they where seen as 2nd tier troops mostly doing service in the rear... and as such they where not given the most modern arms. (just like western militaries today)

So their race was a likely a factor indirectly. It played a role in them being used for this job.
And the job resulting in their less then optimal arms.

 

[FedericoFCavada]

During the U.S. Civil War, there was the notorious 1864 Sand Creek massacre of Cheyenne and Arapaho.
The "payback" came to some degree in winter 1866, immediately after the U.S. Civil War at the "Battle of 100-in-the-hand" or the "Fetterman fight/massacre."
49 U.S. infantry had single-shot muzzle-loading rifle muskets. 27 Cavalry troopers had 7-shot Spencers. A pair of civilian contractors had privately-purchased Henry repeaters. It was the last time U.S. regulars would carry muzzle-loaders into harms way, I think.

The Indians primarily used clubs, knives, the bow and arrow, and some spears and also some firearms.

The online info on Saltville indicated untrained horses in addition to the unsuitable Enfield rifles, which would be a serious deficiency. The Confederate partisans and guerrillas at Simpsonville launched an ambush and were armed with a brace of revolvers, so in that sense it was a close-range affair where a multi-shot pistol would have an advantage, I'd think.

 

[Don Dixon]

My research on Austrian weapons in the Federal Army has indicated that weapons were issued on three basies:

You got what the ordnance officer had in inventory when your requisition was presented. It might not have been what you wanted or the best possible choice, but logistics is logistics.

Within the range of available weapons, front line combat troops got the first and better second class weapons, while troops in support positions (i.e, guarding PW pens, garrison duty, guarding logisitics facilities, etc.) got arms issues which were appropriate to their duties.

The Army of the Potomac got the first and best. As the AOP was armed with first and second class weapons their turn-ins went to units along the southern Atlantic Coast, in Louisiana, or in the west. As those units were rearmed, the turn-ins went to units recruited for short periods of time (i.e., six months, 90 days, etc). Their turn-ins went to state militias.

In general, USCT units were armed comparably to White units performing similar duties.

 

[Championhilz]

Certainly the majority of Union cavalry troopers at least had breech-loading single-shot carbines. A few were armed with repeaters like the 7-shot Spencer. I'm not sure if loading on horseback was all that typical, frankly? I think most cavalry used the horse for mobility, and every now and then for charges or hot pursuit of the enemy, but often fought dismounted like Dragoons.

In the CSA, cavalry sometimes had their horses taken away/ requisitioned, and the units fought as infantry.
Loading an Enfield P53 rifle musket with the U.S. type cartridge would be a real chore while mounted. On foot, it would be no different from what the infantry did.

I do know that the former 1st Mississippi (U.S.) cavalry, later the 3rd U.S. Colored Cavalry used the Model 1855 Colt Root revolving rifle, which was mighty unpopular with Berdan's Sharps Shooters (who wanted Sharps, after all), but was the equivalent of what lots of Iowa cavalry carried on Grierson's Raid, and was used to telling effect by the 21st OVI at Chickamauga.

There have been past threads on the armament of the USCT that might be of interest, or germane to your topic, although I think these were mostly on the "3rd class" and "2nd class" weapons for infantry. I think that by the later parts of the war most USCT carried comparable weapons to any other Federal outfit.

https://history.army.mil/html/books/030/30-24/cmh_pub_30-24.pdf

Hi,
Do you have a source for the 3rd United States Colored Cavalry being armed with Colt revolving rifles? I would love to read it.

 

[FedericoFCavada]

Hi,
Do you have a source for the 3rd United States Colored Cavalry being armed with Colt revolving rifles? I would love to read it.

Earl J. Coates and Dean S. Thomas, An Introduction to Civil War Small Arms (Gettysburg: Thomas Pubs., 1990), p. 92:

Colt Revolving Rifles
Cavalry
3 IL
7 IL
9 IL
15IL
2 IN
2 IA ...
*3 US Colored

Elsewhere, RE: USCT "colored troops":
Smoothbore Model 1842-- 1 US C.T. & 74 US C.T.

Austrian, Prussian or French Smoothbore Muskets: 34 US C.T.

Enfield Rifle Musket .577 cal.--35 US C.T., 48 US C.T., 73 US C.T., 74 US C.T.

Austrian Rifle Muskets .54 cal.--46 US C.T., 48 US C.T., 49 US C.T., 51 US C.T., 51 US C.T., 53 US C.T., 75 US C.T., 76 US C.T.

Austrian Rifle Muskets .577 & .58 cal.-- 47 US C.T., 48 US C.T., 59 US C.T., 75 US C.T.

Belgian or French Rifled Muskets .69 cal. 33 US C.T.

Sharps Rifles--37 US C.T.

Spencer Rifles--37 US C.T.

Sharps Carbines-- Cavalry *3 US Colored

 

[archieclement]

Traditionally a (european) cavalryman would have:
A carbine for dismounted skirmishing. (but can if needed be used mounted)
1-2 pistoles for mounted skirmishing (and can be used against an infantry square at point blank range)
A saber that is used for mounted combat, both during mounted skirmishing and on the actual battlefield.

So the main issue with a full length musket is not that the are hard to load mounted, since they are mainly carried for dismounted work,
But that they are cumbersome. And plenty of csa cavalry units carried full length riflemuskets.

In this case, and Iam just guessing, I would think that they where seen as 2nd tier troops mostly doing service in the rear... and as such they where not given the most modern arms. (just like western militaries today)

So their race was a likely a factor indirectly. It played a role in them being used for this job.
And the job resulting in their less then optimal arms.

Think it's a good guess, troops not at or planned on going to front line probally got corespondingly lower priority at times.

I would imagine if one examines USCT one can find units with 2nd tier weapons.....just as likely if one examines White units they could find units with 2nd tier weapons.

 

[archieclement]

Traditionally a (european) cavalryman would have:
A carbine for dismounted skirmishing. (but can if needed be used mounted)
1-2 pistoles for mounted skirmishing (and can be used against an infantry square at point blank range)
A saber that is used for mounted combat, both during mounted skirmishing and on the actual battlefield.

So the main issue with a full length musket is not that the are hard to load mounted, since they are mainly carried for dismounted work,
But that they are cumbersome. And plenty of csa cavalry units carried full length riflemuskets.

In this case, and Iam just guessing, I would think that they where seen as 2nd tier troops mostly doing service in the rear... and as such they where not given the most modern arms. (just like western militaries today)

So their race was a likely a factor indirectly. It played a role in them being used for this job.
And the job resulting in their less then optimal arms.

Think it's a good guess, troops not at or planned on going to front line probally got corespondingly lower priority at times.

I would imagine if one examines USCT one can find units with 2nd tier weapons.....just as likely if one examines White units they could find units with 2nd tier weapons

 

[Championhilz]

Earl J. Coates and Dean S. Thomas, An Introduction to Civil War Small Arms (Gettysburg: Thomas Pubs., 1990), p. 92:

Colt Revolving Rifles
Cavalry
3 IL
7 IL
9 IL
15IL
2 IN
2 IA ...
*3 US Colored

Elsewhere, RE: USCT "colored troops":
Smoothbore Model 1842-- 1 US C.T. & 74 US C.T.

Austrian, Prussian or French Smoothbore Muskets: 34 US C.T.

Enfield Rifle Musket .577 cal.--35 US C.T., 48 US C.T., 73 US C.T., 74 US C.T.

Austrian Rifle Muskets .54 cal.--46 US C.T., 48 US C.T., 49 US C.T., 51 US C.T., 51 US C.T., 53 US C.T., 75 US C.T., 76 US C.T.

Austrian Rifle Muskets .577 & .58 cal.-- 47 US C.T., 48 US C.T., 59 US C.T., 75 US C.T.

Belgian or French Rifled Muskets .69 cal. 33 US C.T.

Sharps Rifles--37 US C.T.

Spencer Rifles--37 US C.T.

Sharps Carbines-- Cavalry *3 US Colored

Thanks!