Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Vanity: Need help from a Civil War fans
Kolath | 9/29/2012 | Kolath

Posted on 09/29/2012 4:43:22 PM PDT by Kolath

I have a few questions about Civil War Cavalry

1. What makes a cavalry sword different from a regular sword?

2. How big was a typical cavalry regiment?

3. What was the preferred horse rifle?

4. Did any units use lances?

5. What were the differences between light and heavy cavalry?

6. Most notable cavalry officers (North and South)?


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: cavalry; swords
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-106 next last
To: gusty

Grant thought that Scott fought too many battles. Grant’s overland campaign (Wilderness to Petersburg) was intended to fight Lee outside his fortifications. In this he succeeded, though at high cost.

Under Grant, Emory Upton executed rapid assault tactics that broke Lee’s field lines at the Mule Shoe, though the lines were eventually reformed.


61 posted on 09/29/2012 10:08:49 PM PDT by donmeaker (Blunderbuss: A short weapon, ... now superceded in civilized countries by more advanced weaponry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: donmeaker

This is one of those threads that will make me look stuff up


62 posted on 09/29/2012 10:45:37 PM PDT by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!

yeah, Verdun was tops. The Somme was a bloody good one too.


63 posted on 09/29/2012 10:49:45 PM PDT by jmacusa (Political correctness is cultural Marxism. I'm not a Marxist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

I hope so. Hope my time in the stacks at West Point is good for something.

I used to teach Civil War bayonet tactics when I was in the Army. Not that we expected to have to form squares and drive off cavalry, but it was something to teach, and the devil finds work for idle hands.


64 posted on 09/29/2012 10:57:32 PM PDT by donmeaker (Blunderbuss: A short weapon, ... now superceded in civilized countries by more advanced weaponry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

General Leonard Wood was the first commander of the Rough Riders in Cuba, and was promoted to command of the Cavalry brigade when Wheeler fell ill.

He eventually was promoted to Army Chief of Staff. When presented with a prototype of Patton’s sword for approval, and being told that it was designed to emphasize use of the point backed off a bit in his office. He took out his own sword and hacked at the back of a Shaker chair in his office, and then hacked at a similar chair with Patton’s sword. After comparing the two cuts, he stated that by inspection, Patton’s sword would be superior as a piercing tool, but because of its length and weight it was also a superior cutting tool.


65 posted on 09/29/2012 11:05:24 PM PDT by donmeaker (Blunderbuss: A short weapon, ... now superceded in civilized countries by more advanced weaponry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Hoodat

Nah, he means The Civil War(1861-1865) you know, the one the South started.


66 posted on 09/29/2012 11:10:51 PM PDT by jmacusa (Political correctness is cultural Marxism. I'm not a Marxist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jmacusa

Aside from the use of smokeless powder and barbed wire which waited until the Japanese attacks against Russia, there was powerful evidence from the Civil War on the strength of the defense.

Between the Civil War and WWI were two wars by Germany against Austria and France. The key battle against Austria was won because of the Dreyse needle gun, which permitted German infantry to hold off Austrian attacks using muzzle loaders, though outnumbered by over 10 to 1. That ability to stop Austria allowed German concentration on the battlefield and maneuver to Austrian flanks and rear. The later battles against France pitted the Germans against the French with the Chassepot rifle, largely superior to the needle gun, but Germans were able to exploit a superiority in rapid fire light artillery. It was a time of rapid innovation, and a strength in one conflict was likely to be a weakness in the next. Von Moltke (the great) managed to find an advantage and through use of telegraph and rail, was able to communicate his will to subordinates and give them the means to implement his will.

Von Moltke the later and lesser first watered down the key right flank units, and then he lost control of them, creating the weakness exploited by the BEF before Paris.


67 posted on 09/29/2012 11:21:29 PM PDT by donmeaker (Blunderbuss: A short weapon, ... now superceded in civilized countries by more advanced weaponry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: donmeaker
The Germans had a superior rifle, the famed Mauser, from which the U.S.Army would develop the Springfield .30. caliber.Actually the first rapid fire artillery piece was the French 75mm. WW1 began with the Belgians and the French relying on forts, whose lines of sight(where their guns were trained) faced east towards the German border. It was these forts that the German General staff knew would be an impediment to their implementation of the Schlieffen(sp) Plan, a feint into (neutral) Belgium to lure in and tie down the main Anglo-French armies while the main attack would be to the south to Sedan, cross the Meuse, and wheel north towards Paris , trapping the Anglo-French from the rear. As history shows the Germans were unable to do this in WW1. However, we know how it turned out some 20 years later. As to fortifications General Patton observed’’No hole in the ground, anywhere, has ever been successfully defended’’.
68 posted on 09/30/2012 12:01:09 AM PDT by jmacusa (Political correctness is cultural Marxism. I'm not a Marxist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: jmacusa

Patton had difficulty with the fortifications of Driant in WWII. I have been there, and even with nukes, it would be hard to dig motivated defenders out of that hole.

In the Franco Prussian war the French muzzle loaders cannon were matched against Krupp 6 pounders breech loaders.

In the Franco Prussian war the Germans managed a local battle of encirclement at Sedan. In WWI they went around, but were to send an army around Paris. In response to the BEF, the far right army pinched inside Paris, thus losing the ability to encircle, and indeed having to strip off assault forces to protect their flank. The diminished assault forces of the far right army led to a gap between the two right most armies, which was screened over with cavalry. (a lot of cavalry, but still unable to hold against a coordinated attack.) The professional BEF with Lewis machine guns punched in the cavalry and the far right German army fell back. It was not the end, or even the beginning of the end, but the end of the beginning.


69 posted on 09/30/2012 12:23:15 AM PDT by donmeaker (Blunderbuss: A short weapon, ... now superceded in civilized countries by more advanced weaponry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: LastNorwegian
The 6th Pennsylvania Cavalry was known as "Rush's Lancers". They were equipped with 9-foot Austrian-style lances at the suggestion of General McClellan. They were armed with these lances for the first half of the war, even taking part in some of the largest battles of the Eastern Theater (the Peninsula Campaign and Antietam) before turning in their lances for carbines.

The landscape of Northern Virginia was inhospitable to lancer operations, although they did launch a moderately successful charge against a Confederate artillery battery while supporting General Burnside at Antietam, ultimately forcing the artillerymen to withdraw or risk losing their valuable cannon.

70 posted on 09/30/2012 12:34:36 AM PDT by Stonewall Jackson ("I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: donmeaker
But in the overall battles, the defenders of these forts were either cut off, surrounded, pounded to dust or just by passed.
71 posted on 09/30/2012 12:58:40 AM PDT by jmacusa (Political correctness is cultural Marxism. I'm not a Marxist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: donmeaker
One need only to look to the Maginot Line, The Atlantic Wall and The Siegfried Line and see the futility of fixed fortifications.
72 posted on 09/30/2012 1:00:50 AM PDT by jmacusa (Political correctness is cultural Marxism. I'm not a Marxist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Mike Darancette; Kolath; Fiji Hill; ought-six; Homer_J_Simpson
Mike Darancette: "North - Phil Sheridan
South - Nathan Bedford Forrest"

That is the correct answer.

Fiji Hill: "North--Ronald Reagan (as George Custer in Santa Fe Trail)
South--Errol Flynn (as Jeb Stuart in Santa Fe Trail) "

That is obviously the best answer. ;-)

73 posted on 09/30/2012 3:41:22 AM PDT by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: gusty

There is a very(!) contentious argument to be made that Lee imagined that he could make Gettysburg a replay of Austerlitz. I’ll just leave it at that.

However, strategically, Napoleon’s tactic to engage the enemy on a wide front, with a rapid maneuver second echelon looking to penetrate the front at a weak point, showed its fatal flaw to the Americans because of the Civil War. Basically, if both sides do it, you end up with trench warfare.

Because of the Civil War, America learned this lesson, but Europe did not, which really mattered just slightly over 100 years later, when most of Europe learned the lesson, and 21 years after that, for the Russians, since they bowed out of WWI before learning their lesson.

And through the end of the Soviet Union, the Russians still hadn’t learned their lesson, using light and heavy helicopters in tactics similar to light and heavy cavalry, and even integrating nuclear weapons into Napoleonic tactics.

By World War II, the Americans had perfected the fire and maneuver technique that just shreds the Napoleonic tactic. Had Russia invaded western Europe, they would have put their military through a meat grinder.


74 posted on 09/30/2012 5:12:49 AM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy (DIY Bumper Sticker: "THREE TIMES,/ DEMOCRATS/ REJECTED GOD")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: central_va
I would say Nat Forrest was a close second to JEB Stuart.

Why wouldn't you place Forrest above Stuart? On the face of it, it would seem that Forrest was the more successful of the two in battle.

75 posted on 09/30/2012 5:34:33 AM PDT by Delhi Rebels (There was a row in Silver Street - the regiments was out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Delhi Rebels

Its like comparing Tiger Woods to Bobby Jones. Who is the better golfer?


76 posted on 09/30/2012 5:40:53 AM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: NathanBedfordForrest

Ping, since you’re getting mentioned a lot.


77 posted on 09/30/2012 5:59:28 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: central_va
Its like comparing Tiger Woods to Bobby Jones. Who is the better golfer?

Yet you did choose one over the other. I'm just curious as to why as I would have ranked Forrest over Stuart. By my way of thinking Forrest proved himself the superior in independent command while at the same time fulfilling the role of a cavalry commander on those occasions when he was attached to an army. Stuart proved an able commander in the traditional role of cavalry, showed he could take over a major command as when he took over Jackson's corps for a short period at the end of Chancellorsville, but also came up wanting when Lee really needed him as at Gettysburg.

78 posted on 09/30/2012 7:17:57 AM PDT by Delhi Rebels (There was a row in Silver Street - the regiments was out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Stonewall Jackson

I can’t imagine going into a fight on horseback with one of those lances!

I’ll take a Spencer carbine please.


79 posted on 09/30/2012 7:39:03 AM PDT by smokingfrog ( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Kolath

The typical cavalry sword was longer that most imagine—almost 4’—because the extra length was necessary to reach down to infantry soldiers on the ground.

Texas Rangers had become well known as small light cavalry units against the Comanches and were usually armed with two of the repeating Walker Colts, a shotgun, and Bowie knife.

Texas provided cavalry regiments for both the Union and the Confederacy.

A regiment composed mostly of Mexican-Texans was famously headed by Col Santos Benevides.

General Joe Shelby of Missouri’s “Iron Cavalry Brigade” refused to surrender and led his men through Texas to a crossing of the Rio Grande into Mexico near Eagle Pass, hoping to join up with the forces of Maximillian. They sank their flags and regimental banners in a caisson in the river in what became known as the “Burial of the Confederacy” incident.

Don’t forget Phil Sheridan as a prominent Union cavalry leader or Mosby as a Confederate.

Nathan Bedford Forrest was probably a better military tactician and battle leader than Stuart, but Stuart was flashy and attached to Lee’s Army so he got much better press than Forrest who fought in the less well-known western theater.


80 posted on 09/30/2012 8:47:17 AM PDT by wildbill (You're just jealous because the Voices talk oMnly to me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-106 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson