Infantry vs Cavalry - Indian Wars

hatman · July 09, 2016, 07:57:06 PM

I hadn't really that about this before, but lately it's piqued my curiosity. Google didn't find me an answer.

During the Indian Wars period in the American West, what was the mode of transportation for Infantry troops?
Did they ride horses as the cavalry did?
Surely they didn't walk all those vast distances did they or if not horses did they ride in wagons or something?
If they did ride horses what then were the effective differences between infantry and cavalry.

Might sound like dumbass questions, but it's bugging me.

Drydock · July 09, 2016, 08:12:05 PM

Depending on early or late in the IW era: early (1860s, 1870s,) it was often steamboat up the nearest river. Then on foot to what ever destination. Later in the period it was most often train to the nearest location, then again on foot.

This is not as slow as you might think. A tired horse moves no faster than a walking man. Miles and the 5th infantry pursued a force of Sioux under Sitting Bull for nearly 40 miles at Cedar Creek, before the Sioux dispersed in frustration, unable to shake the "Walks a Heaps" as a body.

It was not until motorized transportation became common that the infantry gave up cross country marching. Even then, European armies continued to burn foot leather for several more generations. During WW2, British infantry often bitterly complained of their "coddled" American counterparts, who were carted on lorries everywhere . . .

Professor Marvel · July 09, 2016, 11:11:54 PM

external reference WRT "long combat marches" :

"They can run 50 miles in a day — run, mind you. And then fight a battle at the end."
Lieutenant Gert Adendorff of the 1st/3rd NNC, Natal Carbineers
at Roark's Drift in reference to the Zulu Warriors.

yhs
prof ( i are retired! i have nottin to do but pester ye!) marvel

hatman · July 10, 2016, 01:50:02 AM

Quote from: Drydock on July 09, 2016, 08:12:05 PM
Depending on early or late in the IW era: early (1860s, 1870s,) it was often steamboat up the nearest river. Then on foot to what ever destination. Later in the period it was most often train to the nearest location, then again on foot.

This is not as slow as you might think. A tired horse moves no faster than a walking man. Miles and the 5th infantry pursued a force of Sioux under Sitting Bull for nearly 40 miles at Cedar Creek, before the Sioux dispersed in frustration, unable to shake the "Walks a Heaps" as a body.

It was not until motorized transportation became common that the infantry gave up cross country marching. Even then, European armies continued to burn foot leather for several more generations. During WW2, British infantry often bitterly complained of their "coddled" American counterparts, who were carted on lorries everywhere . . .

Thank you for that insight!

I'm thinking now about the Bozeman Trail fort construction.
Do you think the Infantry marched on foot up to each potential fort site?
I guess I'm only asking because I can't imagine walking that far.

Major 2 · July 10, 2016, 02:36:47 AM

as an aside...may I suggest

Iron Riders: Story of the 1890s Fort Missoula Buffalo Soldier Bicycle Corps

https://www.amazon.com/Iron-Riders-Missoula-Buffalo-Soldier/dp/1575100746

http://www.ltolman.org/99arch/ironridersbook.htm

Drydock · July 10, 2016, 09:05:39 AM

Yes, the Bozeman trail infantry walked to those locations.

St. George · July 10, 2016, 10:06:54 AM

Maybe 'you' can't imagine walking that far, but it's the norm for Infantry, and always has been.

Once they got within their river or depot destination, they walked.

If it rained - they walked.

If it snowed - they walked.

If there were dust storms - they walked.

All of these weather conditions were expected and were a part of their profession.

Cavalry walked a lot, too - especially on long campaigns - saving their mounts for when they were really needed.

Hell, straight-leg Infantry walked over most of Europe during WWII, though trucks were increasingly used, but if the trucks couldn't go further - they got out and walked.

Airborne walked, too - a truism in Airborne is that there are, nor there ever will be trucks on the DZ - after landing, they're foot-mounted and with less personal and organizational equipment than the legs.

There are still Manuals extant from those times (and today - FM-21-18 - Foot Marches - dtd 30 August 2009) that give 'Rates of March' that allow Planners to factor in just how long it might take, and over what terrain they can expect for their Infantry to arrive at the battlefield - and when they do arrive, they're ready to fight.

Scouts Out!

Trailrider · July 10, 2016, 11:26:29 AM

There were some instances during the Indian Wars where the infantry were mounted on horses or mules. BGen George Crook did mount some of his infantry on horses and mules during his portion of the Big Horn & Yellowstone Expedition of 1876. As many of these doughfoots had never been on a horse, the initial results were a "rodeo", much to the amusement of the cavalry troops present who watched the spectacle. There were other instances of using mounted infantry, though I can't pick them out just now.

It is true that a human, if in good physical condition can "walk down" a horse. The Apache warriors did it quite often. Cavalry travelling over country where their horses cannot obtain sufficient feed, may wind up not only dismounted, but using their mounts for their own rations. Examples of this are the "starvation march" of Crook's troops following the Rosebud Battle, as well as the 26th Infantry in the Phillipines during the first part of WWII.

Drydock · July 10, 2016, 12:51:23 PM

"Well, after the first few hundred thousand miles, a man gets limber on his feet."

hatman · July 10, 2016, 01:22:48 PM

Thanks guys! My itch is scratched.

Grenadier · July 10, 2016, 01:55:08 PM

Just imagine the poor Roman legionaries after the Marius reforms. Everywhere you went you walked, you walked in armour, you carried your weapons, your food rations, entrenching equipment, two pilum (Roman spears), your shield (one extant shield is 18lbs) and all the while wearing hobnailed boots with no insole or arch support.

Scattered Thumbs · July 11, 2016, 08:26:22 AM

Quote from: Grenadier on July 10, 2016, 01:55:08 PM
Just imagine the poor Roman legionaries after the Marius reforms. Everywhere you went you walked, you walked in armour, you carried your weapons, your food rations, entrenching equipment, two pilum (Roman spears), your shield (one extant shield is 18lbs) and all the while wearing hobnailed boots with no insole or arch support.

And they did that all over Europe.

Napoleon army did the same. As far as Moscow.

St. George · July 11, 2016, 08:36:49 AM

And back...

Charles Isaac · July 11, 2016, 08:38:06 AM

So, what is the number one reason to NOT join the infantry?

The Pathfinder · July 11, 2016, 09:02:53 AM

Almost makes ya' appreciate saddle sores...almost.

Pitspitr · July 11, 2016, 12:05:39 PM

Quote from: Charles Isaac on July 11, 2016, 08:38:06 AM
So, what is the number one reason to NOT join the infantry?

You enjoy the flavor of horse meat?

Dusty Tagalon · July 11, 2016, 08:05:22 PM

Crooks command heading up the Rosebud had the Infantry on Mules. Although the Cavalry was amused. With the help of the Teamsters, they were ready to go after 2 days training.

Dusty

Niederlander · July 11, 2016, 08:52:18 PM

Quote from: Pitspitr on July 11, 2016, 12:05:39 PM

You enjoy the flavor of horse meat?

Horse can be pretty darned good!

Scattered Thumbs · July 12, 2016, 01:32:47 AM

Quote from: St. George on July 11, 2016, 08:36:49 AM
And back...

Yup!

FTrooper · July 29, 2016, 03:41:46 PM

Walk was most common. Occasionally they rode in Wagons and one officer even designed a special troop carrying wagon (early APC you might say). At the Big Hole in 1877 the 7th infantry rode in wagons. General Miles mounted most of the 5th Infantry on captured Sioux ponies for the later half of the 1870's.

Chris Fischer
F Troop