Whose skirmishers are whose?

[flattop32355]

The "Starting a dismounted cav" thread partly ended up as a "What's the proper way to use skirmishers" thread.

It has always struck me that, if cavalry was present, and unless the opportunity to make a true, mounted cavalry charge was available, or they decided to withdraw fairly quickly, they would dismount, leave the #4's with the horses, and fight in loose order, similar to infantry skirmishers.

If and when infantry support became available, the cavalry would ultimately yield the field to the infantry, who would then throw out their own skirmish line, with each company/regiment/brigade using its own sub-units across its own front, according to how large the main formation was.

I am not familiar with any cases of an infantry company/regiment/brigade keeping its own men all back in line and relying on cavalry, either dismounted (having horses) or unmounted (not having any horses) as its main skirmish line.

Have I missed something?

It would seem reasonable that an infantry formation would choose to rely on its own men to ultimately form that skirmish line, as the officers know each other and have fought together, rather than to rely upon men from a different branch with whom they may not be as familiar in how they operate.

Specific to reenacting, it has been my experience that dismounted cavalry units tend to be somewhat fewer in number, and with smaller numbers of men per unit, than are infantry units, and are armed differently than most infantry units, making it harder to consolidate either into an infantry unit or as their own, larger unit able to take its place on the battle line.

That would seem to me to be the main reasons why at reenactments they are generally relegated to early skirmish line work, or shunted off to the flanks (both of which, ironically, seem to be main functions of cavalry in reality: Hold the line 'til the infantry shows up, and guard the flanks of the line of battle).

[Rob Weaver]

Cavalry should fix the enemy and make him deploy, and hold him long enough for the infantry to take over. This is, I think< called a "delay." After the fight becomes developed, cavalry ride off to the flanks and rear. They become useful again in the pursuit phase, keeping steady pressure on the disorganized and defeated enemy. Seminary Ridge at Gettysburg offers a good example of a delay, while Custer's work at Cedar Creek is a great example of a pursuit.
Last year, we worked with a mounted cavalry company out of Ohio someplace. They dismounted and advanced in a skirmish line, engaging the Confederates. When the fight had developed, the infantry, deployed and passed through the cavalry, who retired to the rear. While the infantry had the opposing line fixed in place, the cavalry mounted and passed to the left behind the next terrain feature, a prominent wooded hill. They reappeared in the Confederate left rear and became the broom, sweeping the Confederate line towrd the infantry dustpan. Most of the Confederates were "gobbled." I think in all my years, it was the best use of the combined arms of infantry and cavalry that I've ever participated in.
Now last Friday at Gettysburg was a typical reenactor blunder. There was a cavalry skirmish line thrown out in front of the infantry. The COnfederates came over the hill, and the cavalry engaged in place. A skirmish line vs an infantry line - and their own line less than 50 yards away. They stayed and fought it out. In my rarely to be confused with humble opinion, they should have been gone at least 5 minutes before they even though of retiring. As it was, they stayed behnd to become decisively engaged. Once the Confederates deployed over the hill, and headed in our direction - Katy bar the door, it was an infantry fight.

[Robert A Mosher]

Both of you offer some very valid observations. Based upon the ideas and principles inherited from the Napoleonic era, a commander at any level will want to consider having as much as one third of his own force commited to the role of pickets/vedettes/skirmishers/flank, advance, and rear guards. This includes those actually deployed as well as those positioned nearby as supports, reserves, and reliefs for those units/personnel deployed. He could reduce this number when part of a larger force as each friendly element would also have out its own guards and skirmishers.

Skirmishers are primarily deployed to fight skirmishers (or to harass the enemy main body if they actually manage to get close enough to it). When an enemy main force element is close enough to see and engage your own main force element, the skirmishers' job is to get out of the way so as not to interfere with the main body's maneuver and fire. The withdrawing skirmishers will either move to the unengaged flanks of the friendly force, move to the rear of the friendly force to become a reserve, or fall in with the main friendly force.

Robert A. Mosher

[7thNJcoA]

One of the best things about cavalry is they have horses! This gives them the ability to redeploy quickly on the battlefield unlike the infantry who can only move as fast as the slowest man. The delay tactic is the forerunner or modern "fix and flank" tactics. After the infantry has taken over the Cavalry can now jump in the saddle and ride to an unsupported flank or re enforce a weak point in the line. The whole point is to screen the enemy and deploy (dismount) in a place where they can hold long enough for infantry support to come up or for the lines to deploy into a defensive posture. I really enjoy the discussions on the forums about tactics of all types! If I only had the property for a horse I would be a cavalryman too...

[Curt-Heinrich Schmidt]

Hallo!

IMHO...

I think that is a good question, but that the reality of history or historical correctness is
greatly hurt by the combination of:

1. lack of historical knowledge of "cavalry"

2. events with limited space and condensed fields of action, and the need to keep the "action" in front of a spectating public

3. the contributions that Reenacting Culture play on what cavalry units can actually do and contribute in emulation of the CW experience versus
how event hosts and commanders know to use them (within the limits of reenacting, safety, etc., etc.,)

4. Reenacting Tradition, and Expectations, where for all of the time, money, and expense involved with a mounted impression would a unit be "happy" with "scouting" when they know where the "enemy" is, and not necessarily get "powder time" and "sabre clinking" time?

Not a negative or criticism of cavalry, just trying to balance what happens when one tries to put increasing history in the same bottle with the modern realities and culture of reenactment simulation and emulation- and shake it up.

CHS

[7thNJcoA]

I agree with you on those points. I know in a hobby as expensive as ours can be, that when you get to an event and are held in reserve during a battle and only get to fire 3 shots until it is over it can be frustrating knowing you took the time out of your schedule and spent your hard earned cash to get the gear and to get to the event pay the registration fees and some of the other expenses. Cavalry guys do pay the highest price for their impression. I have seen some Cavalry used for scouting during tacticals but there is always that problem with limited field of movement. I just cant stand to see the pistoleros that run around with 6 pistols and a henry!

[Yellowhammer Rebel]

I just cant stand to see the pistoleros that run around with 6 pistols and a henry!

Ya especially one that does a Confederate impression. Just goes to show that all those kind of people want to do is "cowboy it up."

On a side note. I have seen Henry's used by an infantry unit on the field and that is an awesome sight. I would not have wanted to run into them in the real war.

[bob 125th nysvi]

that we have a major problem in the training of officers and NCOs handling the skirmish function.

First a lot of officers don't like throwing out a skirmish line, they have few enough men under their command as it is (different topic boys) that if they throw out a skirmish line they now have a 10 man company so they just don't do it.

Secondly, a lot of units don't know how to skirmish. They throw out a bunch of guys who form a line about 3 yards apart in a straight line walking and talking. Skirmishers are supposed to be deployed in groups of 4 (at least one NCO in every two groups) that are deployed two up and two back and moving in what is called in modern terms "bounding".

Third, a lot of skirmishers don't know how to do their jobs. The job isn't to be a "MLR" light. It is to advance and help the officers develop a picture of the enemy deployment. Keep going if you can brush aside an enemy skirmish line, and fall back with information if you contact a significant enemy force.

And get the heck out of the way, or reform with your parent unit when the fur starts to fly.

Now infantry does that in the 50 to 100 yard zone in front of the main unit.

Cavalry does some similar things but farther out. This is because of their mobility. They get out about a mile in advance to develop the situation and send back information.

Battlefield compression is a real problem for reenactors and I think this is one reason why dismounted cavalry (and cavalry in general) does not have a great reputation in the reenacting community. Not only are our spaces too close but let's face it, 5 or 10 guys mounted isn't a cavalry "charge".

And believe me I know all about horses, I got them, I know all about the care and maintenance (and for you dis-mounted guys it is more than half of the real soldiers job) which is WHY I choose not to do the cavalry impression. But I also know that once you have done a mounted cavalry impression you know how far from reality a dis-mounted impression really is.

[Dave Myrick]

Bernie,
To answer your question accurately would depend on the tactical situation. This includes an examination of the terrain involved, the mission and the weapons the troopers have available to them (ie stage of the war, early vs mid vs late).

No cavalry officer is going to give up his men's mobility unless absolutely necessary. Typically mounted vidette's would be posted with a reserve, very similar to an infantry picket post except they are not stationary, they are more like roving patrols to cover the ground. How many videttes, the size of the patrol area and the number in the reserve are dictated by the ground being observed. Behind the mounted reserve would be the main body of the cavalry force. They can be mounted or not, again depending on the tactical situation.
Once the vidette's make contact, word is sent back to the reserve and then to the company and so forth on the nature of the contact. If the contact is hostile and of sufficient force to repulse the vidette's, they are recalled. If the terrain is supportive, a mounted skirmish line is sent forward to contact. Keep in mind this skirmish line also has a mounted reserve ready to rush to the support of the skirmish line. It is possible to dismount the skirmish line, to enable them to better use terrain and weapons if tactically feasible. They are out there to develop the tactical situation for the commander. If they are driven in by the enemy force, they fall back upon the reserve and then back to their company/squadron. By now the main body is engaged. They can fight mounted or dismounted once again as the tactical situation dictates. They remain engaged until they are victorious, withdrawn or put to flight. The presence of friendly infantry in no way absolutely determines the actions of the cavalry force. Keep in mind those guys did not often work well together then. Sometimes they worked well together and others not so well and a detailed study of the cavalry is rife with examples of this. Keep in mind also the purpose of the skirmish line. Would you as an commander trust another outfit to do their jobs correctly when the defense of your command is at stake in a developing tactical scenario? Or would you prudently take precautions to protect your own men by throwing forward a body of skirmishers or pickets of your own?

Buford's defense in depth at Gettysburg is an example of an old Dragoon, adapting to the tactical and strategic situations of the day. His vidette's were out about 4 miles from his main line to give an example of how much room would be used in this type of defense. Kilpatrick and Gregg used much different tactics defending against Stuart's attempted end around over in the East Cavalry Field area of the battlefield. Both sides used mounted and dismounted to great affect in that engagement. Funkstown, Hagerstown and Boonesboro all saw varying degrees of cooperation between cavalry and infantry on both sides.

Indeed, a detailed study of the entire Gettusburg campaign from Brandy Station to Winchester, will open many eyes to the many and varied uses of and roles played by cavalry and infantry on both sides as well as how they were employed depending upon the tactical situation.

How do we accomplish this accurately on the reenacting field is something that I simply dont have the energy to tackle. Space available, numbers available, tactical ability, period tactical knowledge and competing egos all stand to throw nearly insurmountable, not totally but nearly, roadblocks into your path.

Hope this is useful,
Dave Myrick

[7thNJcoA]

Too many units do not realize that once deployed as skirmishers each cell commander usually an NCO takes over and the cell works independently firing and moving as directed. I laugh when I see the whole skirmish line advance at once that would be slaughter it is the basic fire and movement! Some units need to train their NCO's in tactics and stop promoting people to make them happy because they are power hungry! (different topic all together!)