Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Real Cavalry VS Real Dragoons... Something more...

Expand Messages
  • James L. Choron
    I agree. Real Cavalry would win hands down... Now, here s another question for you... Why were there never lancers or Uhlans in the United States Army?
    Message 1 of 23 , Mar 31 11:23 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      I agree. "Real" Cavalry would win hands down... Now, here's another question
      for you...

      Why were there never lancers or "Uhlans" in the United States Army? They
      were effective, in Europe even up to the Crimean War, only a few years
      before our Civil War, and used effectively for thirty or more-odd years
      afterward.
      It would seem, an Uhlan regiment, armed with lance, saber and revolver,
      along British or Prussian lines would have been pretty effective against
      infantry armed with single-shot rifles. This would seem to be especially
      true in the West, where there was more room for horse mounted troops to
      maneuver on the battlefield.

      Jim
    • Bob Huddleston
      Rush s Sixth Pennsylvania Cavalry. However, they are off topic since they participated in the unmentionable war east of the Alleghanies! However, if you ever
      Message 2 of 23 , Mar 31 11:50 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Rush's Sixth Pennsylvania Cavalry. However, they are off topic since they
        participated in the unmentionable war east of the Alleghanies! However, if
        you ever go to the site of that little skirmish in Southern Pennsylvania,
        check out their regimental marker: it has two medal reproductions of their
        lances. Which they turned in early in 1863.

        The problem was that, unlike Europe, the US was still pretty much trees and
        brush and small fields and cavalry, let alone lancers, would not adequately
        maneuver in them.

        And, of course, infantry would have destroyed the lancers before they got
        within lance-length of the bayonets.

        How many times during the War did a cavalry charge break up an infantry
        formation? I can not think of any although there may have been one or two.

        And the problems of mounted charges would have been even more severe in the
        West than in the East.


        Take care,

        Bob

        Judy and Bob Huddleston
        10643 Sperry Street
        Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
        303.451.6376 Huddleston.r@...

        -----Original Message-----
        From: James L. Choron [mailto:lordjim@...]
        Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 12:23 PM
        To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [civilwarwest] Real Cavalry VS Real Dragoons... Something more...

        I agree. "Real" Cavalry would win hands down... Now, here's another question
        for you...

        Why were there never lancers or "Uhlans" in the United States Army? They
        were effective, in Europe even up to the Crimean War, only a few years
        before our Civil War, and used effectively for thirty or more-odd years
        afterward.
        It would seem, an Uhlan regiment, armed with lance, saber and revolver,
        along British or Prussian lines would have been pretty effective against
        infantry armed with single-shot rifles. This would seem to be especially
        true in the West, where there was more room for horse mounted troops to
        maneuver on the battlefield.

        Jim
      • Dick Weeks
        Jim, there was at least one regiment of lancers in the Civil War. They were called Rush s Lancers . They were a Pennsylvania outfit I think. Don t really
        Message 3 of 23 , Mar 31 11:52 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Jim, there was at least one regiment of lancers in the Civil War. They were
          called "Rush's Lancers". They were a Pennsylvania outfit I think. Don't
          really have time to look it up right now.

          I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
          Dick (a.k.a. Shotgun)
          http://www.civilwarhome.com

          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "James L. Choron" <lordjim@...>
          To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 2:23 PM
          Subject: [civilwarwest] Real Cavalry VS Real Dragoons... Something more...


          > I agree. "Real" Cavalry would win hands down... Now, here's another
          question
          > for you...
          >
          > Why were there never lancers or "Uhlans" in the United States Army? They
          > were effective, in Europe even up to the Crimean War, only a few years
          > before our Civil War, and used effectively for thirty or more-odd years
          > afterward.
          > It would seem, an Uhlan regiment, armed with lance, saber and revolver,
          > along British or Prussian lines would have been pretty effective against
          > infantry armed with single-shot rifles. This would seem to be especially
          > true in the West, where there was more room for horse mounted troops to
          > maneuver on the battlefield.
          >
          > Jim
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • jblake47
          The lancers were effective in their day, but as the technology changed and more effective weapons came on-line with longer range, the quick charge that would
          Message 4 of 23 , Mar 31 12:30 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            The lancers were effective in their day, but as the technology
            changed and more effective weapons came on-line with longer range,
            the quick charge that would infact bring lancers the 100 yards from
            musket range to battleline in less time it would take to reload a
            musket were passing into history.

            With the "digging in" and using more defensive cover would also
            negate the advantage of the lancers. Even the regular cavalry was
            being phased out with the limited use of saber and side-arm going by
            the wayside. Carbined troopers with rapid movement and greater
            firepower were slowing being developed during the CW.

            Jeff


            --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "James L. Choron" <lordjim@r...>
            wrote:
            > I agree. "Real" Cavalry would win hands down... Now, here's another
            question
            > for you...
            >
            > Why were there never lancers or "Uhlans" in the United States Army?
            They
            > were effective, in Europe even up to the Crimean War, only a few
            years
            > before our Civil War, and used effectively for thirty or more-odd
            years
            > afterward.
            > It would seem, an Uhlan regiment, armed with lance, saber and
            revolver,
            > along British or Prussian lines would have been pretty effective
            against
            > infantry armed with single-shot rifles. This would seem to be
            especially
            > true in the West, where there was more room for horse mounted
            troops to
            > maneuver on the battlefield.
            >
            > Jim
          • Harry Smeltzer
            The Lancer s did indeed carry the weapons, up to right before Gettysburg. BTW, they were brigaded with the US Regulars in the Reserve Brigade of the AoP s
            Message 5 of 23 , Mar 31 12:45 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              The Lancer's did indeed carry the weapons, up to right before Gettysburg.
              BTW, they were brigaded with the US Regulars in the "Reserve Brigade" of the
              AoP's cavalry corps, and were referred to as the "7th US" as a show of
              respect. This regiment was recruited from Philadelphia's elite social
              class, and included George Meade's son early in the war.

              Harry

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Dick Weeks [mailto:shotgun@...]
              Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 2:53 PM
              To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Real Cavalry VS Real Dragoons... Something
              more...

              Jim, there was at least one regiment of lancers in the Civil War. They were
              called "Rush's Lancers". They were a Pennsylvania outfit I think. Don't
              really have time to look it up right now.

              I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
              Dick (a.k.a. Shotgun)
              http://www.civilwarhome.com

              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "James L. Choron" <lordjim@...>
              To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 2:23 PM
              Subject: [civilwarwest] Real Cavalry VS Real Dragoons... Something more...


              > I agree. "Real" Cavalry would win hands down... Now, here's another
              question
              > for you...
              >
              > Why were there never lancers or "Uhlans" in the United States Army? They
              > were effective, in Europe even up to the Crimean War, only a few years
              > before our Civil War, and used effectively for thirty or more-odd years
              > afterward.
              > It would seem, an Uhlan regiment, armed with lance, saber and revolver,
              > along British or Prussian lines would have been pretty effective against
              > infantry armed with single-shot rifles. This would seem to be especially
              > true in the West, where there was more room for horse mounted troops to
              > maneuver on the battlefield.
              >
              > Jim
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >




              Yahoo! Groups Links
            • jblake47
              ... since they ... However, if ... Pennsylvania, ... of their ... trees and ... adequately ... they got ... infantry ... or two. ... I would doubt there were
              Message 6 of 23 , Mar 31 1:54 PM
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Huddleston"
                <huddleston.r@c...> wrote:
                > Rush's Sixth Pennsylvania Cavalry. However, they are off topic
                since they
                > participated in the unmentionable war east of the Alleghanies!
                However, if
                > you ever go to the site of that little skirmish in Southern
                Pennsylvania,
                > check out their regimental marker: it has two medal reproductions
                of their
                > lances. Which they turned in early in 1863.
                >
                > The problem was that, unlike Europe, the US was still pretty much
                trees and
                > brush and small fields and cavalry, let alone lancers, would not
                adequately
                > maneuver in them.
                >
                > And, of course, infantry would have destroyed the lancers before
                they got
                > within lance-length of the bayonets.
                >
                > How many times during the War did a cavalry charge break up an
                infantry
                > formation? I can not think of any although there may have been one
                or two.
                >

                I would doubt there were any sincere cavalry charges against massed
                infantry. First of all the cavalry would need to get into the "no-
                man's-land between the two lines, thereby exposing themselves to
                massef fire and negating the support from the friendly fire from
                behind.

                Their effectiveness would be better used to flank the end of the
                line, using thier speed to get behind and create havoc. By havoc I
                don't mean anything other than making the enemy nervous about having
                a cav regiment running loose in their rear.

                On the battlefield the cavalry could not charge from behind battle
                lines because there was no room for them to pass thru the elbow to
                elbow infantry line.

                Their most effective use would be in raids, scouting, harrassing the
                infantry from behind and rear guard, other than cav to cav battles.
                What was happening was the initial stages of an archaic form of
                military operations.

                Jeff

                > And the problems of mounted charges would have been even more
                severe in the
                > West than in the East.
                >
                >
                > Take care,
                >
                > Bob
                >
                > Judy and Bob Huddleston
                > 10643 Sperry Street
                > Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
                > 303.451.6376 Huddleston.r@c...
                >
                > -----Original Message-----
                > From: James L. Choron [mailto:lordjim@r...]
                > Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 12:23 PM
                > To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
                > Subject: [civilwarwest] Real Cavalry VS Real Dragoons... Something
                more...
                >
                > I agree. "Real" Cavalry would win hands down... Now, here's another
                question
                > for you...
                >
                > Why were there never lancers or "Uhlans" in the United States Army?
                They
                > were effective, in Europe even up to the Crimean War, only a few
                years
                > before our Civil War, and used effectively for thirty or more-odd
                years
                > afterward.
                > It would seem, an Uhlan regiment, armed with lance, saber and
                revolver,
                > along British or Prussian lines would have been pretty effective
                against
                > infantry armed with single-shot rifles. This would seem to be
                especially
                > true in the West, where there was more room for horse mounted
                troops to
                > maneuver on the battlefield.
                >
                > Jim
              • James L. Choron
                All, I agree with the arguments against lancers in combat. I was just wondering, as much as some elements on both sides tended to try and copy European
                Message 7 of 23 , Mar 31 11:09 PM
                • 0 Attachment
                  All,

                  I agree with the arguments against lancers in combat. I was just wondering,
                  as much as some elements on both sides tended to try and copy European
                  fighting styles, weapons and uniforms, why, at least initially, this type of
                  cavalry formation wasn't used. I think the lessons learned at Balaclava, by
                  the British, and in Mexico, where a single patrol, armed with revolvers
                  could route an entire company of Mexican lancers might have played a part in
                  it.What do you think?

                  Jim


                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: "jblake47" <jblake47@...>
                  To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 1:54 AM
                  Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Real Cavalry VS Real Dragoons... Something
                  more...


                  > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Huddleston"
                  > <huddleston.r@c...> wrote:
                  > > Rush's Sixth Pennsylvania Cavalry. However, they are off topic
                  > since they
                  > > participated in the unmentionable war east of the Alleghanies!
                  > However, if
                  > > you ever go to the site of that little skirmish in Southern
                  > Pennsylvania,
                  > > check out their regimental marker: it has two medal reproductions
                  > of their
                  > > lances. Which they turned in early in 1863.
                  > >
                  > > The problem was that, unlike Europe, the US was still pretty much
                  > trees and
                  > > brush and small fields and cavalry, let alone lancers, would not
                  > adequately
                  > > maneuver in them.
                  > >
                  > > And, of course, infantry would have destroyed the lancers before
                  > they got
                  > > within lance-length of the bayonets.
                  > >
                  > > How many times during the War did a cavalry charge break up an
                  > infantry
                  > > formation? I can not think of any although there may have been one
                  > or two.
                  > >
                  >
                  > I would doubt there were any sincere cavalry charges against massed
                  > infantry. First of all the cavalry would need to get into the "no-
                  > man's-land between the two lines, thereby exposing themselves to
                  > massef fire and negating the support from the friendly fire from
                  > behind.
                  >
                  > Their effectiveness would be better used to flank the end of the
                  > line, using thier speed to get behind and create havoc. By havoc I
                  > don't mean anything other than making the enemy nervous about having
                  > a cav regiment running loose in their rear.
                  >
                  > On the battlefield the cavalry could not charge from behind battle
                  > lines because there was no room for them to pass thru the elbow to
                  > elbow infantry line.
                  >
                  > Their most effective use would be in raids, scouting, harrassing the
                  > infantry from behind and rear guard, other than cav to cav battles.
                  > What was happening was the initial stages of an archaic form of
                  > military operations.
                  >
                  > Jeff
                  >
                  > > And the problems of mounted charges would have been even more
                  > severe in the
                  > > West than in the East.
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Take care,
                  > >
                  > > Bob
                  > >
                  > > Judy and Bob Huddleston
                  > > 10643 Sperry Street
                  > > Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
                  > > 303.451.6376 Huddleston.r@c...
                  > >
                  > > -----Original Message-----
                  > > From: James L. Choron [mailto:lordjim@r...]
                  > > Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 12:23 PM
                  > > To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
                  > > Subject: [civilwarwest] Real Cavalry VS Real Dragoons... Something
                  > more...
                  > >
                  > > I agree. "Real" Cavalry would win hands down... Now, here's another
                  > question
                  > > for you...
                  > >
                  > > Why were there never lancers or "Uhlans" in the United States Army?
                  > They
                  > > were effective, in Europe even up to the Crimean War, only a few
                  > years
                  > > before our Civil War, and used effectively for thirty or more-odd
                  > years
                  > > afterward.
                  > > It would seem, an Uhlan regiment, armed with lance, saber and
                  > revolver,
                  > > along British or Prussian lines would have been pretty effective
                  > against
                  > > infantry armed with single-shot rifles. This would seem to be
                  > especially
                  > > true in the West, where there was more room for horse mounted
                  > troops to
                  > > maneuver on the battlefield.
                  > >
                  > > Jim
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                • John Beatty
                  ... technology changed and more effective weapons came on-line with longer range, the quick charge that would infact bring lancers the 100 yards from musket
                  Message 8 of 23 , Apr 1, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    >The lancers were effective in their day, but as the
                    technology changed and more effective weapons came
                    on-line with longer range, the quick charge that would
                    infact bring lancers the 100 yards from musket range
                    to battleline in less time it would take to reload a
                    musket were passing into history.

                    To get just slightly off-topic...Richtofen started WWI
                    in the Uhlans. Lancers may have been passing into
                    history, but they didn't do it very fast.

                    =====
                    _________________________________
                    John D. Beatty, Milwaukee Wisconsin
                    AMCIVWAR.COM/AMCIVWAR.NET
                    "History is the only test for the consequences of ideas"

                    __________________________________
                    Do you Yahoo!?
                    Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway
                    http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/
                  • Mark Peters
                    ... John, This is a good point. British, German and Austraian lancers were all operational during WWI, although the machine gun and trench warfare made them
                    Message 9 of 23 , Apr 1, 2004
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, John Beatty <jdbeatty.geo@y...>
                      wrote:
                      > >The lancers were effective in their day, but as the
                      > technology changed and more effective weapons came
                      > on-line with longer range, the quick charge that would
                      > infact bring lancers the 100 yards from musket range
                      > to battleline in less time it would take to reload a
                      > musket were passing into history.
                      >
                      > To get just slightly off-topic...Richtofen started WWI
                      > in the Uhlans. Lancers may have been passing into
                      > history, but they didn't do it very fast.

                      John,

                      This is a good point. British, German and Austraian lancers were all
                      operational during WWI, although the machine gun and trench warfare
                      made them somewhat ineffective. The last cavalry charge in Europe,
                      that I know of, was by the Poles in an attempt to halt German tanks
                      in 1939. As you say, there passing into history was a somewhat slow
                      process.

                      With regards to European lancers, I think Tom would agree, is that
                      they were used to counter attack against spent charges from the heavy
                      cavalry. They were not primarily used against infantry due to the
                      problems of firepower and the skill required to ride a horse
                      and 'stick people' with a long pole. The nature of the Civil War
                      provided increased firepower and the mounted 'trooper'.

                      Mark
                      >
                      > =====
                      > _________________________________
                      > John D. Beatty, Milwaukee Wisconsin
                      > AMCIVWAR.COM/AMCIVWAR.NET
                      > "History is the only test for the consequences of ideas"
                      >
                      > __________________________________
                      > Do you Yahoo!?
                      > Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway
                      > http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/
                    • Tom Mix
                      Yes, Mark, I agree. There was always a romanticism attached to the flash and dash of the lancers that was slow to die. But technology made the lancer himself
                      Message 10 of 23 , Apr 1, 2004
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Yes, Mark, I agree. There was always a romanticism attached to the flash
                        and dash of the lancers that was slow to die. But technology made the
                        lancer himself die quickly. Gen. John Buford was a pioneer in
                        transforming the cavalry into what he would an eclectic form of mobile
                        infantry. He is often referred to as the father of today's rapid
                        helicopter transported infantry, sometimes called cavalry in today's
                        American army.
                        Buford wanted the cavalry to do more than scout, raid and harass. He
                        believed the cavalry actually take and hold territory until the more
                        numerous infantry arrived. He displayed this beautifully at Gettysburg
                        on Day One. They occupied the ground of their choosing and held until
                        1st Corps arrived. They did it with repeating fire carbines of a greater
                        range than those of Napoleonic times and with mobility. When he saw a
                        problem, he promptly mount some men to fill, adjust or extend a line as
                        the need arose.

                        He was not adverse to the charge and used the sword when needed but felt
                        the cavalry needed to evolve with modern technology to survive and that
                        is where the eclectic part comes in. Buford believed the cavalry could
                        do much more than scout and raid. He would not live beyond the end of
                        1863 so he did not get to see his theory bloom as it soon would. This
                        was especially true in the up-coming Indian Wars that would follow the
                        Civil War.

                        The lancers were simply an archaic wing of the cavalry by this time.
                        That is one reason they did not exist in the U.S. Regular Cavalry. The
                        one mentioned was a volunteer unit from Pa. As noted by others, the
                        lancers did exist up to 1939 but not as a rational and realistic
                        military entity. The rifled musket, breech loading carbine, the
                        Winchester, the machine gun each made the Lancer a suicidal adventure.

                        The terrain in both the Eastern and Western Theaters of the Civil War
                        made the lance an impractical tool.

                        The American Indians of the Plains also used lances but would stop for
                        the same reason. They were getting blown out of the saddle by the
                        dismounted cavalry with repeating carbines and rifles. They too would
                        adjust and carry the same weapons along with pistols.

                        The lance had seen its day at Waterloo. But the Polish Lancers were a
                        beautiful sight to see.

                        Tom Mix

                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: Mark Peters [mailto:mark-peters.midlandsandnorth@...]
                        Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 8:13 AM
                        To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Real Cavalry VS Real Dragoons... Something
                        more...

                        --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, John Beatty <jdbeatty.geo@y...>
                        wrote:
                        > >The lancers were effective in their day, but as the
                        > technology changed and more effective weapons came
                        > on-line with longer range, the quick charge that would
                        > infact bring lancers the 100 yards from musket range
                        > to battleline in less time it would take to reload a
                        > musket were passing into history.
                        >
                        > To get just slightly off-topic...Richtofen started WWI
                        > in the Uhlans. Lancers may have been passing into
                        > history, but they didn't do it very fast.

                        John,

                        This is a good point. British, German and Austraian lancers were all
                        operational during WWI, although the machine gun and trench warfare
                        made them somewhat ineffective. The last cavalry charge in Europe,
                        that I know of, was by the Poles in an attempt to halt German tanks
                        in 1939. As you say, there passing into history was a somewhat slow
                        process.

                        With regards to European lancers, I think Tom would agree, is that
                        they were used to counter attack against spent charges from the heavy
                        cavalry. They were not primarily used against infantry due to the
                        problems of firepower and the skill required to ride a horse
                        and 'stick people' with a long pole. The nature of the Civil War
                        provided increased firepower and the mounted 'trooper'.

                        Mark
                        >
                        > =====
                        > _________________________________
                        > John D. Beatty, Milwaukee Wisconsin
                        > AMCIVWAR.COM/AMCIVWAR.NET
                        > "History is the only test for the consequences of ideas"
                        >
                        > __________________________________
                        > Do you Yahoo!?
                        > Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway
                        > http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/





                        Yahoo! Groups Links
                      • James L. Choron
                        John, That was my point. I had a great-uncle in the Imperial German Army. He was an engineering officer, but was posted with the 1st Uhlan Guards for a while.
                        Message 11 of 23 , Apr 1, 2004
                        • 0 Attachment
                          John,

                          That was my point. I had a great-uncle in the Imperial German Army. He was
                          an engineering officer, but was posted with the 1st Uhlan Guards for a
                          while. He saw service in the Boxer Rebellion, in 1900 as a part of that
                          unit. As far as I know, the last Uhlan charge, by German forces, with
                          lances, was against the
                          Imperial Russian Army at the battle of Tannenburg, in 1915.

                          Jim


                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: "John Beatty" <jdbeatty.geo@...>
                          To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
                          Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 4:10 PM
                          Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Re: Real Cavalry VS Real Dragoons... Something
                          more...


                          > >The lancers were effective in their day, but as the
                          > technology changed and more effective weapons came
                          > on-line with longer range, the quick charge that would
                          > infact bring lancers the 100 yards from musket range
                          > to battleline in less time it would take to reload a
                          > musket were passing into history.
                          >
                          > To get just slightly off-topic...Richtofen started WWI
                          > in the Uhlans. Lancers may have been passing into
                          > history, but they didn't do it very fast.
                          >
                          > =====
                          > _________________________________
                          > John D. Beatty, Milwaukee Wisconsin
                          > AMCIVWAR.COM/AMCIVWAR.NET
                          > "History is the only test for the consequences of ideas"
                          >
                          > __________________________________
                          > Do you Yahoo!?
                          > Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway
                          > http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                        • Kristin Scherrer
                          Dear Group, Due to my upcoming wedding this July and the end of school and all that comes with both of those I am requesting removal from this group simply
                          Message 12 of 23 , Apr 1, 2004
                          • 0 Attachment

                            Dear Group,

                             Due to my upcoming wedding this July and the end of school and all that comes with both of those I am requesting removal from this group simply because of lack of time.  Thank you for letting me be a part of this discussion and I wish you all the best.

                            Kristin Scherrer


                            Do you Yahoo!?
                            Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway - Enter today
                          • John Beatty
                            ... was by the Poles in an attempt to halt German tanks in 1939. WAYYY off topic...the Polish cavalry that attacked the German panzers were heavy infantry on
                            Message 13 of 23 , Apr 1, 2004
                            • 0 Attachment
                              >The last cavalry charge in Europe, that I know of,
                              was by the Poles in an attempt to halt German tanks
                              in 1939.

                              WAYYY off topic...the Polish cavalry that attacked the
                              German panzers were heavy infantry on horseback backed
                              by howitzers. The romantic vision most of us have
                              from that incident ain't quite right.

                              =====
                              _________________________________
                              John D. Beatty, Milwaukee Wisconsin
                              AMCIVWAR.COM/AMCIVWAR.NET
                              "History is the only test for the consequences of ideas"

                              __________________________________
                              Do you Yahoo!?
                              Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway
                              http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/
                            • NPeters102@aol.com
                              In a message dated 4/1/2004 3:42:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, lordjim@rol.ru writes: I was just wondering, as much as some elements on both sides tended to try
                              Message 14 of 23 , Apr 1, 2004
                              • 0 Attachment
                                In a message dated 4/1/2004 3:42:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, lordjim@... writes:
                                I was just wondering, as much as some elements on both sides tended to try and copy European fighting styles, weapons and uniforms, why, at least initially, this type of cavalry formation wasn't used. I think the lessons learned at Balaclava, by
                                the British, and in Mexico, where a single patrol, armed with revolvers could route an entire company of Mexican lancers might have played a part in it.What do you think?
                                 
                                Jim:
                                 
                                You may be right. The 6th PA Cavalry, "Rush's Lancers," wouldn't have carried lances if they would have been formed earlier, like many other units, in the summer of 1861. By the fall of that year, when they were formed, there were not enough traditional weapons to go around. "Little Mac" asked Rush if he would consider using lances. Eric Wittenberg wrote the following re: Rush's response:
                                 
                                "Because there were no other weapons available to the men of the 6th Pennsylvania, Rush had little choice but to agree to McClellan's request."
                                 
                                 
                                Sincerely,

                                Mike Peters
                                npeters102@...
                                 
                              • DPowell334@AOL.COM
                                In a message dated 4/1/2004 10:10:31 AM Central Standard Time, ... And ignores both Italian and Soviet use of Cavalry on the Eastern front, besides:) Dave
                                Message 15 of 23 , Apr 1, 2004
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  In a message dated 4/1/2004 10:10:31 AM Central Standard Time, jdbeatty.geo@... writes:

                                  WAYYY off topic...the Polish cavalry that attacked the
                                  German panzers were heavy infantry on horseback backed
                                  by howitzers.  The romantic vision most of us have
                                  from that incident ain't quite right.




                                  And ignores both Italian and Soviet use of Cavalry on the Eastern front, besides:)

                                  Dave Powell
                                • GnrlJEJohnston@aol.com
                                  In a message dated 4/1/2004 11:08:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, wacogaurds64@yahoo.com writes: Due to my upcoming wedding this July and the end of school and
                                  Message 16 of 23 , Apr 1, 2004
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    In a message dated 4/1/2004 11:08:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, wacogaurds64@... writes:

                                    Due to my upcoming wedding this July and the end of school and all that comes with both of those I am requesting removal from this group simply because of lack of time.  Thank you for letting me be a part of this discussion and I wish you all the best.

                                    Kristin Scherrer

                                    Congrats on all Kristin -  Always remember what Shakespeare said about getting married. "What fools us mortals be." 
                                     
                                    JEJ
                                  • Tom Mix
                                    Nor is the often felt notion that the Poles were stupid and backward accurate. The attack was supported with available modern ordinance. True, the Lancers
                                    Message 17 of 23 , Apr 1, 2004
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Nor is the often felt notion that the Poles were "stupid" and "backward"
                                      accurate. The attack was supported with available modern ordinance.
                                      True, the Lancers were outmoded but there was a reason for the attack
                                      but there was also a logical reason for its failure.
                                      Tom Mix

                                      -----Original Message-----
                                      From: John Beatty [mailto:jdbeatty.geo@...]
                                      Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 10:07 AM
                                      To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
                                      Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Re: Real Cavalry VS Real Dragoons...
                                      Something more...

                                      >The last cavalry charge in Europe, that I know of,
                                      was by the Poles in an attempt to halt German tanks
                                      in 1939.

                                      WAYYY off topic...the Polish cavalry that attacked the
                                      German panzers were heavy infantry on horseback backed
                                      by howitzers. The romantic vision most of us have
                                      from that incident ain't quite right.

                                      =====
                                      _________________________________
                                      John D. Beatty, Milwaukee Wisconsin
                                      AMCIVWAR.COM/AMCIVWAR.NET
                                      "History is the only test for the consequences of ideas"

                                      __________________________________
                                      Do you Yahoo!?
                                      Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway
                                      http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/




                                      Yahoo! Groups Links
                                    • John Beatty
                                      ... the Eastern front, besides:) Not to mention the US in the Phillipines... ===== _________________________________ John D. Beatty, Milwaukee Wisconsin
                                      Message 18 of 23 , Apr 1, 2004
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        >And ignores both Italian and Soviet use of Cavalry on
                                        the Eastern front, besides:)

                                        Not to mention the US in the Phillipines...


                                        =====
                                        _________________________________
                                        John D. Beatty, Milwaukee Wisconsin
                                        AMCIVWAR.COM/AMCIVWAR.NET
                                        "History is the only test for the consequences of ideas"

                                        __________________________________
                                        Do you Yahoo!?
                                        Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway
                                        http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/
                                      • Daniel Giallombardo
                                        Congratulations !!!!!! I look forward to a time when you (and your spouse) can return.--Dan _____ From: Kristin Scherrer [mailto:wacogaurds64@yahoo.com] Sent:
                                        Message 19 of 23 , Apr 1, 2004
                                        • 0 Attachment

                                                                                          Congratulations !!!!!! I look forward to a time when you (and your spouse)  can return.--Dan

                                           


                                          From: Kristin Scherrer [mailto:wacogaurds64@...]
                                          Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 10:06 AM
                                          To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
                                          Subject: [civilwarwest] Goodbye

                                           

                                          Dear Group,

                                           Due to my upcoming wedding this July and the end of school and all that comes with both of those I am requesting removal from this group simply because of lack of time.  Thank you for letting me be a part of this discussion and I wish you all the best.

                                          Kristin Scherrer


                                          Do you Yahoo!?
                                          Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway - Enter today

                                        • James L. Choron
                                          Mike, Being a Texan, I m fairly up on the Mexican War. The reason I mentioned it was because I know of several instances where cavalry, both United States
                                          Message 20 of 23 , Apr 2, 2004
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Mike,
                                             
                                            Being a Texan, I'm fairly up on the Mexican War. The reason I mentioned it was because I know of several instances where cavalry, both United States regular troops and Texas Rangers, broke up charges by lancers and compeltely routed them, even though outnumbered significantly, simply because the Rangers and U.S. troops were armed with pistols.
                                             
                                            I can see where the 6th would take lances, because there was no other option, but I can't see them choosing that weapon as a "first choice". I would also tend to wonder how long the lances remained in service, once better weapons came available.
                                             
                                            Jim
                                          • NPeters102@aol.com
                                            In a message dated 4/2/2004 10:30:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, lordjim@rol.ru writes: I would also tend to wonder how long the lances remained in service, once
                                            Message 21 of 23 , Apr 3, 2004
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              In a message dated 4/2/2004 10:30:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, lordjim@... writes:
                                              I would also tend to wonder how long the lances remained in service, once better weapons came available.
                                              Jim:
                                               
                                              The lances of the 6th PA Cavalry were exchanged for Sharps carbines prior to Gettysburg. Tom Smith of the unit wrote the following in a 2 June 1863 letter to his brother:
                                               
                                              "The regiment have turned in their lances and ordered carbines."
                                               
                                              The full letter is found in "We Have it Damned Hard Out Here" The Civil War Letters of Thomas W. Smith, 6th Pennsylvania Cavalry," edited by Eric Wittenberg.
                                               
                                               
                                              Sincerely,

                                              Mike Peters
                                              npeters102@...
                                            • jblake47
                                              One must also remember that the armament of the American Plains Indian consisted mostly of lance and bow. While there is a lot of discussion on this, it is a
                                              Message 22 of 23 , Apr 3, 2004
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                One must also remember that the armament of the American Plains
                                                Indian consisted mostly of lance and bow. While there is a lot of
                                                discussion on this, it is a known fact that the Plains Indians were
                                                one of the best light cavalry ever produced in the world. One of
                                                the main reasons the Plains were the last to be conquered was
                                                because these horsemen could outfight the whites on most occasions.

                                                Inroads to the plains began in the southwest with the Texans moving
                                                into Apache and Commanche territories, somethings the Mexicans
                                                couldn't do. As they did so, they quickly found out that the
                                                armament they carried was inappropriate for the type of warfare the
                                                Indians capitalized upon. Once a single shot rifle or pistol was
                                                discharged, the person was unarmed for quite some time. In the
                                                meantime a well trained warrier could have as many as 3 - 4 arrows
                                                in the air at the same time. A definite advantage of firepower.
                                                The lance was the coup de gras to save arrows when the enemy had
                                                fired their weapon.

                                                The most significant change in plains warfare occured with the
                                                multiple round handgun. The Texas Rangers quickly found out that
                                                this weapon at least put them on equal footing with the superior
                                                weaponry of the Indian. Walker even went so far as to get his hands
                                                on as many revolvers that were available throughout the US,
                                                traveling east to collect as many as were available. He even
                                                designed one for specific use from the Colt Mfg company which was
                                                heavy enough to be used as a club when emptied.

                                                Only when the handgun was developed could the full use of cavalry be
                                                attained. This applied with the saber in Civil War combat and as
                                                time went on specialty handguns were developed to improve the life
                                                expectancy of the trooper. The LaMat was a classic example of such
                                                a weapon. It was too heavy to carry on a belt and had to be carried
                                                in a saddle holster. It fired 9 rounds of ball and a 20 guage
                                                shotgun round. This along with other side-arms began to change the
                                                tactics of cavalry operations. This was something that had been
                                                learned from the Texans the the earlier years dealing with the
                                                plains Indians. Off horseback, the shortened, repeating carbine
                                                held an advantage. The increase in firepower against mounted enemy
                                                again changed the face of the cavalry. The Lancers were on their
                                                way out as were the traditional saber armed troopers. Being mounted
                                                offered a quick manuvering ability, but until small, repeating
                                                weapons were developed, limited them the increased firepower of the
                                                enemy.

                                                Jeff

                                                --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "James L. Choron"
                                                <lordjim@r...> wrote:
                                                > Mike,
                                                >
                                                > Being a Texan, I'm fairly up on the Mexican War. The reason I
                                                mentioned it was because I know of several instances where cavalry,
                                                both United States regular troops and Texas Rangers, broke up
                                                charges by lancers and compeltely routed them, even though
                                                outnumbered significantly, simply because the Rangers and U.S.
                                                troops were armed with pistols.
                                                >
                                                > I can see where the 6th would take lances, because there was no
                                                other option, but I can't see them choosing that weapon as a "first
                                                choice". I would also tend to wonder how long the lances remained in
                                                service, once better weapons came available.
                                                >
                                                > Jim
                                              • Mark Peters
                                                ... Don t patronise. War is not romantic, and if you have that vision ...
                                                Message 23 of 23 , Apr 5, 2004
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, John Beatty <jdbeatty.geo@y...>
                                                  wrote:
                                                  > >The last cavalry charge in Europe, that I know of,
                                                  > was by the Poles in an attempt to halt German tanks
                                                  > in 1939.
                                                  >
                                                  > WAYYY off topic...the Polish cavalry that attacked the
                                                  > German panzers were heavy infantry on horseback backed
                                                  > by howitzers. The romantic vision most of us have
                                                  > from that incident ain't quite right.

                                                  Don't patronise. War is not romantic, and if you have that
                                                  vision ...
                                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.