There's something I've been wondering about...

I have never had the opportunity to be sent out as a skirmisher.  Most of the mainstream Ohio events there are groups of Berdan sharp shooters and Dismounted Cavalry present. Now I don't care what anyone wants to portray, and I'm not agrueing the authenticity of dismounted cavalry or berdans at every event.

What I'd like to now is why they get sent out as skirmishers every time?  Can they be used in another way to make room for a normal infantry unit to be skirmishers?  Is it fiar they they get to go first just because they purchased a different uniform?

Didn't the sharpshooters and dismounted cavalry ever fight like regular infantry? Are the powers that be just not imaginative enough?  I'm not complianing, but genuinely curious.

I think the question is important. However, the folks you need to be asking are the event organizers. The only way things will change is if someone asks for it or demands it.

Anyway, I don't know how you'd get the folks you mentioned involved at an event but, by the way they are currently used.

"Unmounted"- Dismounted implies there's actually a horse somewhere.

Quote :

TheBaldYankee wrote : There's something I've been wondering about... Didn't the sharpshooters and dismounted cavalry ever fight like regular infantry? Are the powers that be just not imaginative enough?  I'm not complianing, but genuinely curious.

The Berdan Sharpshooters offically known as the 1st and 2nd United States Sharpshooters fought as regular infantry at the battle of Antietam along the bloody lane and until they were allowed to fight as they were trained as skirmishers they got bloodied at Bloody Lane.

The US Sharpshooters were only in the Army of Potomac and should not appear at an event such as Cedar Creek as they were not there. Other Union independent sharpshooter units were present in most of the theaters of the CW.

At an event were they were present they are used as skirmishers because that is what they did and were trained for. Depending on the size of the event Regular Infantry could also be used as skirmishers. I suspect the events in Ohio of which you speak are smaller and if the Regular Infantry went out as skirmishers there would be no one to come up and fight the main battle.

Hope this helps..

Quote :

TheBaldYankee wrote : There's something I've been wondering about... Didn't the sharpshooters and dismounted cavalry ever fight like regular infantry? Are the powers that be just not imaginative enough?  I'm not complianing, but genuinely curious.

Anthony,

Let me put on my evil event organizer hat for a few moments.  

The answer to your question is yes, sharpshooters and dismounted cavalry did indeed fight like regular infantry during the Civil War. They also often served as skirmishers. In many cases, the cavalry was the first units on the scene. They would often dismount, deploy as skirmishers and also fight as infantry. Think Buford at Gettysburg. In the Confederate service, there were entire battalions of sharpshooters who served as skirmishers and regular infantry. So that's the history.

Now, lets look at things from the perspective of the event organizer/commander. Because of the length of the carbines, cavalry can't safely fight in two ranks, which means the commander needs to come up with a way to utilize the folks with  short weapons in a historically correct manner.

My solution has been to use the dismounted cavalry as skirmishers during tacticals and flank support during scrïpted scenarios. During the tacticals, it keeps my infantry formations intact. During the scrïpted scenarios, it reduces problems with the folks who don't want to play by the rules. It never fails that some small group thinks it would be neat to sneak around the flanks. My dismounted cavalry keeps these folks from screwing up the scenarios.

Some events don't allow dismounted cavalry or sharpshooters to participate. That's another discussion.  

For events portraying battles later in the war, probably everyone should be in skirmish formation, or in reserve.  And half the fellows in "skirmish" formation should also be in reserve.

As far as Berdan's, for most of the war you shouldn't be able to tell them from the rest of the Union infantry, except for their weapons.  If we are to believe Rudolf Aschmann, they wore the issue blouse in the field.

Points understood.  I guess My point is that I'd like to see things shaken up once in awhile.  I still enjoy the roll I play.  

I'd venture to say that most local Ohio events aren't really representing either theater 100% accurately, but there seems to be a lean towards western theater.  I could be mistaken, but then that would leave the Berdan fellows completely out.  But if wild Bill can show up, I guess they can too.  Heck at Zoar Wild Bill and Buffalo Bill showed up!  (I actually talked to Wild Bill at a gun show, and he's a really nice guy.  Didn't have the heart to tell him that his presence at CW events, dressed as a marshal is well... that's besides the point.)

I like the idea of putting the Dismounts and the Berdans as flank support, but what say do I have.  I guess I'll have to bring this up to the higher ups with the Army of the Ohio, or Birney's Division, next time I find myself chatting with them.  

--Last edited by TheBaldYankee on 2008-01-24 17:48:17 --

Quote :

TheBaldYankee wrote : Heck at Zoar Wild Bill and Buffalo Bill showed up!

Wild Bill sure does get around. He's at Old Bedford Village every year. Sometimes has a lady friend with him.  

Quote :

Michael Schaffner wrote : As far as Berdan's, for most of the war you shouldn't be able to tell them from the rest of the Union infantry, except for their weapons.  If we are to believe Rudolf Aschmann, they wore the issue blouse in the field.

Michael,

This would depend on the time period. I like to call 1862 the year of berdan since that is the year they got all the press with California Joe etc etc. They had the greenish black uniform at that time along with the issue blouse. Pictures of California Joe (Truman Head) show him in the field with the blouse. Most other photos show the Berdans in the green. By 1863 it was a big mix depending on the company and when things were reissued. The frock usually in the spring went to summer storage. By the time Gettysburg rolls around most were wearing the blouse with the green hat. The leggings were usally long gone by this time and most of the hair on knapsacks were lost or ruined.

At Gettysburg NMP we usally wear the green uniforms because the park service has requested this since the public expects us to be in green. Usally a few fellows are in a mix of the clothing and we explain to the spectators that by the time the Battle of Gettysburg arrived in most cases you would only see the green hat and of course the sharps rifle.

The uniform of the berdan and when they wore what has always been a subject of discussion. They were reissued the green frock all during the war and even a PA Inf regiment received them near the end of war  since that was what was available when mustered. I am at work and can't remember what regiment it was.

Cavalry fighting dismounted certainly "fought as infantry" but with some subtle differences that depended on the manual that was being used. The vast majority of the time, when in line of battle, there was only a single rank. Again, depending on the manual, there may be several paces between each man (same as infantry skirmishers, I believe). But, when the shooting started, the dismounted cavalry skirmish line didn't differentiate much from infantry skirmishers. There's plenty of evidence where cavalry companies up to divisions were dismounted to fight on foot during the war.

I've never been an event organizer (only a special breed of masochist would take that job) but one of the reasons, IMHO, that you see the Berdan's and dismounted cavalry on the flanks is that there just aren't that many of them at any one event to make a real dent in any attack/defense by themselves. I know from experience that, without a mounted force to play with, those of us of the dismounted persuasion would prefer that type of activity as opposed to having to fall in with the infantry line.  

--Last edited by mstuart on 2008-01-24 17:38:16 --

Quote :

MStuart wrote :  I know from experience that, without a mounted force to play with, those of us of the dismounted persuasion would prefer that type of activity as opposed to having to fall in with the infantry line.

Mark,

For the past couple of years, Ive brigaded the mounted and dismounted cavalry together. Obviously, there are things they can't do together, but other things seem to work quite well.  

Quote :

Bill wrote : Mark, For the past couple of years, Ive brigaded the mounted and dismounted cavalry together. Obviously, there are things they can't do together, but other things seem to work quite well.

Bill:

For the last 3-4 years that has worked well for us. We have the trust of the mounted folks we work with that we won't "yahoo" it up, and they have ours that we won't be told "go into the woods and do what you do". I think if more dismounted units got into a partnership with mounted ones there'd be a lot less mistrust of dismounted cavalry as a whole. That's fodder for another thread, though.  Suffice it to say that working with a mounted unit from beginning to end of an event works very well for us. I wish more would do it.  I wish more event organizers would think that way, too.  

--Last edited by mstuart on 2008-01-24 19:23:01 --

Deleted by poster.  

--Last edited by oldkingcrow on 2008-02-13 15:56:44 --

"Memoirs of a Swiss Officer in the American Civil War", chapter 1, "Organizing the Company, Ride to Washington":

"For daily use or so-called lesser tenue we had a blue flannel jacket which was worn in the field even by officers."

Chris,

Good to see you here!

Quote :

MStuart wrote :   Wild Bill sure does get around. He's at Old Bedford Village every year. Sometimes has a lady friend with him.

The Gun show I saw him at was in Berea OH, just southwest of Cleveland.  He shows up at alot of Ohio events, so I'm assuming he live somewhere in Northeast OH.  Old Bedford Village is only a few hours away.  That's assuming we're talking about the same guy.

That's good info here about Dismounted Cavalry.  I also think it would be more enjoyable for them to do something different once in  awhile.  I'm still new, and still have alot to learn about battle tactics, but I think it'd be good.  And, of course you could have the man on the mic explaining everything to the crowds.

Quote :

TheBaldYankee wrote : I also think it would be more enjoyable for them to do something different once in  awhile.  I'm still new, and still have alot to learn about battle tactics, but I think it'd be good.  And, of course you could have the man on the mic explaining everything to the crowds.

Just to keep the thread going, what would you have us (dismounted cavalry) do differently?  

--Last edited by mstuart on 2008-01-25 21:33:14 --

That's a dangerous question to ask.  In the spirit of this forum, I'll leave the answer to some other green faced, green uniformed monster.

I will note that in the western Confederate armies, the generals had a name for dismounted cavalry : they called them infantry.  

Quote :

MStuart wrote :   Just to keep the thread going, what would you have us (dismounted cavalry) do differently?

That's what I'm asking here.  As I mentioned, I still have alot to learn about tactics.  This is a part Civil War history that I never gave much thought to until I started reenacting.  

All I'm getting at is I'd like to try being a skirmisher too.  Now if my unit gets sent out as skirmishers, then there needs to be an asignment for the sharp shooters and dismounted Cavalry.  If anyone can point me to the right sources to find this out it'd be appreciated.

Quote :

silas wrote : I will note that in the western Confederate armies, the generals had a name for dismounted cavalry : they called them infantry.

Silas,

There were actually two definitions of dismounted cavalry. The first was for cavalry that didn't have horses. The second was for cavalry whose horses were somewhere else. You are right, the cavalry without horses were used as infantry. In fact, in many cases, they were armed as infantrymen.

The mounted cavalry, who were fighting on foot, were another story. They were rarely left to fight as infantrymen for long periods. It makes perfect sense that the horses, who were big expensive targets, would be taken to a safe location, well away from the firing line. I do believe this is the impression of most of the dismounted cavalrymen in our hobby. Most of these folks do a good job with their impression. Sad to say, they have been burdened with a minority, who are about the worst the Hobby has to offer. I think you would find that most dismounted cavalrymen are well aware of the bad eggs in their basket. The Federals have the exact same issues with some of the Sharpshooter units out there.

IMHO, the lack of opportunities for regular infantry to serve as skirmishers has more to do with a lack of training and the fear of commanders losing control of their soldiers, rather than the few dismounted cavalry and sharpshooters on the field.

From a mainstream battalion commander view, there needs to be a place to put sharpshooters, unmounteds, shore parties and other specialty impressions.  The reason I've seen unmounted cavalry used as skirmishers is that there isn't a better place to utilize their unique impressions.  The best place to place a company of soldiers with short barreled rifles where they are less dangerous to themselves and others is as skirmishers.