Why didn't the cavalry play a bigger part in US Civil War ?

McArmalite

Maybe this should be on the History forum but anway, watching documentry's on the American Civil War, I noticed that Cavalry played a very little role in it. Most of the battles were just Infantry and Artillery. The Cavalry seemed to be used mostly for raids against the enemy. So why didn't the Cavalry play a bigger part ?

Manic Moran

Ask yourself what the roles of cavalry are, even today.*

If you get the answer right, that should explain to a very large extent why they don't show up in the main battles all that much.

NTM

*For clues... actually, the whole answer, read the manual: FM 17-95, Chapter 1, available at a few websites

McArmalite

Manic Moran wrote: »

Ask yourself what the roles of cavalry are, even today.*

If you get the answer right, that should explain to a very large extent why they don't show up in the main battles all that much.

NTM

*For clues... actually, the whole answer, read the manual: FM 17-95, Chapter 1, available at a few websites

Well that's very informative thank you.

Hagar

I just Googled the manual and it does give some really good info in fairness.

Here's a link.

Manic Moran

McArmalite wrote: »

Well that's very informative thank you.

You're welcome.

I could either paraphrase the manual, copy and paste the manual, or simply direct you to the manual.

Either way, the answers you seek are... in the manual. Clearly and concisely.

I should also point out that I wasn't being flippant or lazy. When I mentor my lieutenants, I never give them a straight answer. I get them to think about it a bit, direct their thought processes a bit, and then tell them where to do some research. I find it tends to be more successful at educating them than simply telling them the answer outright.

NTM

minidazzler

Even back in the Legions of Rome Cavalry were not used as extensively as people think, Pre Marius they were simply rich men who could afford a horse. As all the Legions were before the reforms, it was only men who owned land were in the Armies.

Manic Moran

OK. So now that you've had a day to chew on the manual, what are your questions?

NTM

citizen_p

really it was only in the medieval period cavalry was used alot as shock troops. but only knights could afford them.

PYRO#1

I suppose you have to take account of the factors around the time and the region that was involved in hostilities.
The battlefield wasnt always suited to cavalry tactics and formations. Also the armies didnt always have great cavalry commanders especially ones who followed orders and doctorine, and should have stayed with the armies but instead went glory hunting.
Also there wasnt very much cavalry in the armies and they were expensive to train and equipe, must easier to form infantry units. Also technology was becoming extremely unfriendly towards cavalry, they made good targets for the infanrty weapons of the time and so couldnt be used as the had been in battle.
This was ultimately the beginning of the end in 50 years from that period Horse cavalry would be obsolete!!!

raindog.promo

I think I remember hearing that they were used a lot for scouting and reconnaissance.
Didn't the use of machine (gattling) guns from this war onwards mark the beginning of the end for cavalry?

Manic Moran

Gatling guns did not enter service until after the Civil War ended, and the infantry weapons of the time were generally muzzle-loaders. The only forces to be armed as a matter of course with repeating rifles were actually the Union cavalry.

It was simply a matter of efficiency: You got more bang for your buck using the horses outside high-intensity combat. That's what the infantry is for, after all.

NTM