jaguar
Junior Member
Posts: 74
|
Post by jaguar on May 28, 2015 13:45:25 GMT -6
Fred: If Custer's command was revealed by dust wouldn't the location and size of the mounted Indian forces be revealed to Custer as well?
|
|
|
Post by dave on May 28, 2015 13:58:18 GMT -6
Quincannon: You confused me when you wrote: "You have been reading all too many funny books. I would suggest to you that it takes the very same stuff to ride in Colts tank as it did to mount a horse draw your saber and ride into shot and shell. The difference is in degree. If hit in 1865 you got a hole in you, probably a fairly clean hole, fell off your horse and brake your neck. Today you would be burned alive to a crisp. It's all relative." I thought for sure you were making a comparison between an assault by horse cavalry and tanks. The fact that you could be killed either way is not disputed and irrelevant to the point. Frontal assaults by cavalry were more successful during Napoleon's time not because of smooth bores but because an assault would include 20k or more heavy cavalry on open ground. Cannons created the problem for cavalry then as did the square formation. In the CW there was little open ground and not near enough cavalry to attempt a charge against infantry whether they shot smooth bore flint locks or percussion cap rifled muskets. I am not dogmatic except as it concerns my desire to make sure my comments are accurately portrayed when I receive a reply. If someone puts words in my mouth I don't claim them. Jaguar Regarding the highlighted part of your post, are you familiar with the exploits of Nathan Bedford Forrest? He used cavalry at Fallen Timbers, Chickamauga after the retreat started, and at Brice’s Crossroads. He often used his cavalry against infantry, mounted and dismounted. He used tactics of common sense since he had no military trainining, unlike Custer who frittered his unit into smaller and smaller numbers. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on May 28, 2015 13:59:40 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by dave on May 28, 2015 14:09:21 GMT -6
We don't have cheatgrass but we have the ubiquitous kudzu which will take over if left unchecked. Can grow almost 12 inches a day. Regards Dave
|
|
jaguar
Junior Member
Posts: 74
|
Post by jaguar on May 28, 2015 14:33:26 GMT -6
Dave: I am familiar with Forrest and have read his biography. A frontal assault by cavalry I wrote was rarely successful not never successfull. Forrest was primarily a raider not a set piece commander. In any event everything depends on circumstances and there were few of them to allow for a frontal attack as opposed to use on the flanks. Nothing is wrong with a West Point education Jeb Stuart might argue.
|
|
|
Post by dave on May 28, 2015 14:52:05 GMT -6
Beth You can be the resident horticulturist for the board. I don't id the stuff in the yard just mow it all. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by Beth on May 28, 2015 15:16:18 GMT -6
Beth You can be the resident horticulturist for the board. I don't id the stuff in the yard just mow it all. Regards Dave I have always said that I find the battlefield at LBH as interesting as the battle and can't help feel the irony that if it hadn't been for Custer we won't have this relatively untouched bit of America's past--that and it's not really tillable or feeling the pressure of development.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on May 28, 2015 15:42:41 GMT -6
Once heard Buffalo grass, but that does but work either. It is in the eastern Dakota's Minn., Iowa, Nebraska. Probably a description rather than type.
|
|
|
Post by dave on May 28, 2015 15:45:33 GMT -6
Shiloh is another example of a battlefield changed little since 1862 except for monuments and roads. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by fred on May 28, 2015 15:52:39 GMT -6
Fred: If Custer's command was revealed by dust wouldn't the location and size of the mounted Indian forces be revealed to Custer as well? Who said this? What is the context? Where? With what in mind? At what time and place in the battle? And ultimately, so what? Your comment above makes absolutely no sense because there is no context... one of my biggest bug-a-boos. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on May 28, 2015 20:45:54 GMT -6
Shiloh is another example of a battlefield changed little since 1862 except for monuments and roads. Regards Dave One of these day I really hope to get there. Beth
|
|
|
Post by dave on May 29, 2015 8:25:55 GMT -6
Beth Let me know when and I'll hook up with y'all. It is beautiful. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by jodak on Mar 2, 2016 10:51:50 GMT -6
This seemed to be as good a place as any to put this. From This Day in U.S. Military History -
March 2, 1865 – Union General George Custer’s troops rout Confederate General Jubal Early’s force, bringing an end to fighting in the Shenandoah Valley... In1864, Early drove through the valley to threaten Washington, D.C., as he tried to relieve pressure on Lee, who was pinned down near Richmond. That fall, General Ulysses S. Grant, the Union commander, dispatched General Philip Sheridan to stop Early. At Cedar Creek on October 19, Sheridan achieved his goal. The Confederates were soundly defeated, but the remnants of Early’s force lingered at the southern end of the valley through the winter of 1864 and 1865. Grant ordered Sheridan to move further west and destroy a railroad in southwestern Virginia. As Sheridan marched from the valley, Early sent a few hundred cavalry under General Thomas Rosser to block his path. On March 1, Rosser set fire to a bridge along the middle fork of the Shenandoah River, but Custer, leading the advance units of Sheridan’s army, charged across the burning span and extinguished the fire before the bridge was destroyed. The next day, Custer followed Sheridan’s orders and chased down the bulk of Early’s force, which numbered about 2,000. Custer and about 5,000 troops found the Confederates entrenched along a ridge near Waynesboro. Part of the Yankee army shelled the Rebel position, while the rest slipped undetected through some woods that stood between Early’s line and the South River. Custer gave the order in the late afternoon, and the Union troops stormed out of the woods and swarmed over the Confederate trenches from the rear. In a short time, 80 percent of the Confederates were captured and only nine Federal troops were killed. Early and his staff narrowly escaped over the Blue Ridge Mountains, marking the end of the Confederate presence in the Shenandoah Valley.
|
|
|
Post by dave on Mar 2, 2016 13:04:00 GMT -6
jodak Good post! The Valley was often forgotten and considered the back water part of the conflict but it did feed the Confederacy. Sheridan's mission was to burn it black and he did. Sad times, sad times. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by jodak on Mar 2, 2016 16:19:09 GMT -6
This piqued my interest enough to do a little more digging. According to Wiki, Sheridan's entire command was progressing toward Waynesborough, with Custer's force in advance. Custer's orders from Sheridan were to, "proceed to Waynesborough, ascertain something definite in regard to the position, movements, and strength of the enemy, and, if possible, to destroy the railroad bridge over the South River at that point." In other words, Custer's assigned mission was more or less just to scout the Confederate position and wait for Sheridan and the rest of the force to come up. Instead, he chose to attack an entrenched defensive position. Not to say that wasn't the proper thing to do or what the circumstances warranted, and it turned out well, but the fact that he exceeded his orders and attacked in advance of the intended time, without waiting for his commander, is similar to what later transpired at the LBH. It could be an indication of Custer's propensity to do these things, or, conversely, it might have set a precedent in his mind as to what was appropriate.
|
|