|
|
Post by ulan on May 4, 2012 2:29:17 GMT -6
I still have big problems to understand the strength of the companies in ralation to the overall strength of the regiment.
The 7th cavalry starting the campaign with 12 Companies and a overall strength of around 600 men and officers. That should mean a company strength of around 40 to 50 men.
How correspond this with the strenght we can count on the battlefield.
I don´t count scouts or zivilians and read that Custer had around 205 soldiers with him in his command of 5 companies. That would made a maximum of 40 men each company.
Reno himself counts around 100 men in his skirmish line. I guess he meant men without counting officers and so he had around 120 soldiers(?). That would made also a maximum of 40 men each company.
I am not sure how many men Benteen had exactly. But from all i have read he had less then 120 men. So i guess he had also a maximum of 40 men each company.
Counting these 11 companies together we have a total of around 440 soldiers max.
McDougall protect the pack train and he probably had a maximum of 50(more likely 40)soldiers in his company. I read that the pack train made around 127 men. Reno said he had around 400 men under command on the Reno/Benteen hill.
It seems that a lot of soldiers, up to 127 possibly?, came with the packs. I know in the company strenght of the 7th cavalry were counted normaly 4 support men(2 farriers & blacksmiths, 1 each saddler and wagoner), but i guess as the whole companies(regiment) was hard understrenght that it was the same with the support men? If those men had ideal strenght(what i doubt) then with the packs came 24 farriers & blacksmiths, 12 saddler and 12 wagoner = 48 men. There would be still a problem with 70 to 80 men without command.
Is there an error in my summation?
Can i btw read somewhere exactly how many men were with Reno and how many with Benteen?
|
|
|
|
Post by steve1956 on May 4, 2012 6:46:09 GMT -6
Don't forget each company also detached 6 men to the train as well as McDougall's men....There's also those who didn't accompany the regiment at the end..The Band,The Horseless recruits,the sick.........
|
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 4, 2012 6:59:34 GMT -6
Ulan: The full "wartime" strength of a cavalry regiment was slightly over 1200 personnel in 1876. That is a very confusing number but it is meant to mean that under the ideal conditions there was a requirement for 12 companies of about 100 men each in wartime.
Where all this becomes confusing is that only Congress can authorize manning levels, and this is done through the appropriation of funds and overall strength caps placed on the army as a whole. Therefore while the requirement may be for 100 men Congress may say no you may only be authorized 75 or 60, or 20 or whatever they decided.
So at LBH we see an average company strength of 65 or so. Now when you subtract the sick, the lame, the lazy, those detailed to other duties, those that are not deemed trained enough to go to the field, those detailed to the pack train, and so forth the "in the field carrying a carbine meet the hostiles head on" strength of each company was around forty personnel.
Now to give you a picture of what this would be like. Today when a company dips below 70 percent of its required strength it would be considered unready for combat. Every unit in the field with the 7th Cavalry that day was unready for combat for a number of reasons but strength, and the amount of real training they received were deciding factors here.
If your requirments are for 100 though and you only have 40, I don't care if those 40 were composed of men like Erwin Rommel. Arthur Wellsley, Audie Murphy, and Napoleon himself, you are going in on short rations and if you get thumped on the battlefield you must look to this reason first to find answers. Numbers matter.
|
|
|
|
Post by fred on May 4, 2012 7:19:29 GMT -6
I still have big problems to understand the strength of the companies in ralation to the overall strength of the regiment. Can this be read? Ulan, If you cannot down-load this file, let me know. It is in Excel format and I can e-mail it to you if you want. It will give you a complete breakdown of where every man was on June 25th. Failing all that, you would have to buy my book to see the chart. Best wishes, Fred. Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by ulan on May 4, 2012 7:29:47 GMT -6
About the sick, the lame, the lazy........What dos it mean on a pack train without wagons. If someone was to sick to ride, then he had no chance of a transport in a wagon. I don´t see a chance for any sickness when you are in a agressive move of the troops like the 7th was in the days before they meet indians. Were the sick transported lying on the back of their horses?
Horseless? Did the regiment not take replacement hoses with the pack train?
What sense dos it made to take donkeys for a faster movement when the train were slowed down by men on foot then. A wagon train would be faster then.
I heard for the first time that each company had 6 men detached to the pack train. What was the sense of that...protection?
|
|
|
|
Post by steve1956 on May 4, 2012 7:44:44 GMT -6
I'm referring to a difference in regimental strength beteen leaving Fort AL and the regiment splitting from Terry...There were about 80 new recruits who marched on foot due to lack of mounts..Equally,others became sick in this period and stayed with Terry.........
|
|
|
|
Post by ulan on May 4, 2012 7:44:57 GMT -6
I still have big problems to understand the strength of the companies in ralation to the overall strength of the regiment. Can this be read? Ulan, If you cannot down-load this file, let me know. It is in Excel format and I can e-mail it to you if you want. It will give you a complete breakdown of where every man was on June 25th. Failing all that, you would have to buy my book to see the chart. Best wishes, Fred. Thank you! Too bad i never use excel so i have it not installed on my pc  Can you tell me please the title of your book....is it available in europe? |
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 4, 2012 7:52:11 GMT -6
Ulan: The sick, the lame, the lazy is another one of those Americanisms. It means those that are not present in the ranks for some known or unknown reason. It does not actually mean they are sick, lame, or even lazy.
Spare horses: Yes there were some spare horses. Fred or AZ, maybe others could speak to exact numbers, not I.
Pack train detail: Each company was required to detail five or six men to the pack train to assist with the train animals not to guard the train, although they could function in that manner were it required. Company B was the train guard. The number five or six is unclear as to if it was five or six. Sources vary. In fact I suppose it could have varied from company to company.
Please forgive me in the use of terms that may not be in general use worldwide. When I talk to Fred for instance, us having gone to the same schoolhouse, knowing or knowing of many of the same people, I sometimes revert to a shorthand terms used by people that shared the same experiences. Sometimes I just need to realize that I am not always talking to Fred.
|
|
|
|
Post by fred on May 4, 2012 8:13:28 GMT -6
Can you tell me please the title of your book....is it available in europe? Ulan, Yes, it is available in Europe and a lot of other places as well. The title is, Participants in the Battle of the Little Big Horn. If you Google my full name-- Frederic C. Wagner III-- it should come up and there are some sites that list a number of dealers. It is also available from Amazon and from the publisher, McFarland and Co. Publishers. Also, it is available in e-book format for about half the price. The funny part about it is that I find myself referring to it all the time. So at least for me, it has become something worthwhile. I am also very flattered by the reviews. Amazon reviewers gave it 5-stars; a former Smithsonian librarian said it is a "must have," and others have said the same thing, including the Western Writers of America. I am not ashamed to say I have been flattered and humbled by the reviews. People have been very kind to me. Best wishes, Fred. |
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 4, 2012 8:21:31 GMT -6
Fred: It seems then that we can assume that Georgetown produces more than basketball players and lawyers. Hoya Saxa
|
|
|
|
Post by markland on May 4, 2012 8:57:27 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by ulan on May 4, 2012 9:14:27 GMT -6
Pack train detail: Each company was required to detail five or six men to the pack train to assist with the train animals not to guard the train, although they could function in that manner were it required. Company B was the train guard. The number five or six is unclear as to if it was five or six. Sources vary. In fact I suppose it could have vaied from company to company. . Just to get that clear to me...these five or six men are meant not including saddlers, blacksmith etc. It was five or six men plus the saddler, the wagoner, the blacksmith and the farrier.....together 9 or 10 men detached from each company to their pack train right? Thanks for the list markland! I have taking the company strenght from this site: home.comcast.net/~jbusse1/troopers.htmRegimental staff: 8 officers, 6 non-commissioned officers Company organization: 3 officers, 11 non-commissioned officers, 2 farriers & blacksmiths, 1 each saddler and wagoner, and 60 privates, totaling 78 officers & enlisted men per company. This is a bit different |
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 4, 2012 9:24:20 GMT -6
Ulan: As far as I know that is correct, five or six men. As to the others I presume that to be the case but have no direct knowledge. Regardless if the total was 6 or 10 that takes a heck of a lot of combat power away from the forward elements. I would, mind you I am not a packer and have absolutely no experience here, think that number to be quite high in the norm. This however was not the norm. The information I have suggests that these were wagon mules pressed into service as pack animals and the experience in packing in general and with untrained pack mules in general spells a big problem that would have to be offset by a higher than usual number of personnel detailed to the train to manage the animals.
|
|
|
|
Post by markland on May 4, 2012 9:45:51 GMT -6
Ulan, without spending a lot of time right now, I'd guess 2 of the 6 man discrepancy is due the author counting two blacksmiths and two farriers rather than one each. You cwn now go to the Internet Archive and download the actual Army Registers for various years including 1875.
Billy
|
|
|
|
Post by markland on May 4, 2012 9:48:56 GMT -6
|
|
