|
Post by markland on Dec 24, 2005 7:50:54 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Dec 24, 2005 8:45:27 GMT -6
Billy, that's fascinating stuff. We really don't know, do we, just how much proper training the 7th's horses would have got; from this, it sounds like very little as standard practice. It must have depended entirely on individual officers. My guess -- and it's only a guess -- is that those with CW cavalry combat experience would have understood the skills a charger needed, and might have done what they could to teach them (for instance, Keogh at one point, in 1869 I think, writes of being kept very busy "training young horses"); but younger officers, or those with non-cavalry CW experience, might not have? By the time Dorst is writing this, of course, the whole CW generation is out of the picture, so one can certainly understand the knowledge not being current ... Another piece that might be of interest: www.militaryhorse.org/resources/ordreport/no297.asp
|
|
|
Post by fred on Dec 29, 2005 17:33:23 GMT -6
Paul & Billy--
Thanks for all this stuff on horses vs. humans; it is very useful to me. And as things would normally prove out, I just ran across something from Jim Willert in his "LBH Diary." This is from Crook's column:
"[Correspondent John] Finerty was impressed-- especially by the hardy foot troops advancing far ahead [they had left the Ft Reno encampment 2 hours ahead of the cavalry, 4am 3Jun76]. He paid them tribute: '... We used to joke about the infantry & call them by their Indian nickname of "walk-a-heaps," but before the campaign was over we recognized that man is a hardier animal than the horse, & that shank's mare is the very best kind of charger.'" [p. 87]
Neat, huh?
Again, thanks, & happy new year, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by stevewilk on Dec 30, 2005 10:07:17 GMT -6
Fred; a few more interesting quotes regarding infantry:
"After the fourth day's march of a mixed command, the horse does not march faster than the foot soldier, and after the seventh day, the foot soldier has to end his march earlier and earlier each day, to enable the cavalry to reach the camp the same day at all" (Col. William B. Hazen, 6th Infantry, before a Congressional committee, 1878)
"The infantry made a standing joke of the boast that if we only marched far enough they would eat all the cavalry horses" (Lt. Walter Schuyler, aide to Gen. Crook, regarding the "horsemeat march", 1876)
"The fight continued at longe range until a Sioux man saw the walking soldiers coming. When the walking soldiers came near, the Sioux became afraid and ran away" (Minneconjou warrior Red Horse, referring to the action on Reno Hill, interview in 1881)
"As I was still suffering from sciatic rheumatism, Capt. Lawton informed me that he was going to send me back to Oposura. He said that in case I met General Miles, I was to tell him that he (Capt. Lawton) did not want any more infantrymen, and told me to say to him that he might as well try to hunt Indians with a brass band". (Henry Daly, civilian packer with Lawton's troops during the Geronimo campaign, 1886)
The problem with infantry of course was the lack of mobility. Some commanders, like Miles, countered this by mounting their foot soldiers when possible on captured Indian mounts. Another option was having them ride in wagons if possible. At McClellan Creek, Texas in 1874 there was even a combined cavalry/infantry charge on Grey Beard's Cheyennes, with Co. D 5th infantry riding in wagons.
Later in the period, as railroads branched out, infantry could be much more rapidly deployed where needed. The foot soldier was not encumbered with a horse to feed, water and groom. When the cavalryman's mount played out, he became a foot soldier toting a horse. An infantry unit, emaciated though they were, could employ every man in combat without having to detail every fourth man to horseholding duty. The infantry had only to concern themselves with one weapon, the rifle, whereas the horsemen had two; three if you include the sabre. Interesting to note that like the sabre, the foot soldier's bladed weapon, the bayonet, was usually not carried on campaigns.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Dec 30, 2005 11:08:57 GMT -6
Steve--
Thank you, VERY much. I cannot tell you how much I appreciate this infoformation from all you guys.
Happy new year! Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by Saugus Zouave on Dec 30, 2005 13:26:13 GMT -6
Billy,
Thanks for the Cavalry Journal article.
Note that it repeatedly emphasizes keeping the same rider with the same horse. Custer swapped horses around just before the campaign to make the companies color-coordinated. It irritated the men, but more importantly, it irritated the horses.
Horses have very, very sensitive skin. They can actually feel the weight transfer when the rider moves their eyes from side to side. This is why it is so important for hunter/jumper and dressage riders to control exactly where they are looking. The horse can tell and responds accordingly. The good news is that a good rider can get the horse to respond to extremely subtle cues. Watch a professional cowboy cut cattle and you'll know what I mean. The horse seems to know what the rider is thinking before the rider does.
The bad news is that slight differences in cues can confuse the horse. The horse doesn't really know why it is supposed to be doing something, it just knows what you are asking it to do. If you don't ask in exactly the same way each time, it doesn't know what to do. It is almost impossible for two different riders to give subtle cues in the same way. That means the horse is only going to be able to respond to gross commands like go and stop. Collecting and extending gaits and things like that are out of the question. Imagine trying to drive a car where the brake and the gas are on/off switches and you'll get the idea what I'm talking about.
Horses will get tired of this real quick. If you are lucky they will just get sluggish and unresponsive. This is what the beginners horses at lots of stables are like. They get ridden by 10 different, bad riders a day, so they just give up paying attention. That's great for getting kids started riding, but it's not what you want in a cavalry mount. If you are less lucky and have a spirited horse, they might indicate their displeasure by taking a nip out of your backside when you're not watching. Remember, horse are faster than humans. Once a horse takes it in its head to bite or kick you, there is nothing you can do to prevent it except staying out of range. The best plan is to make sure it doesn't get the idea in the first place. The last thing you want to have to worry about on a campaign is dealing with an attitude problem on the part of your horse.
One final comment: the 7th supposedly had good looking horses. A healthy, well conformed horse is better than a sickly or scrawny horse with conformation problems, but it might or might not be a well-trained horse.
Cheers,
Paul
PS. Happy New Year Fred and everyone else.
|
|