- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 50
Posted by "Ian Edwards" <iedwards@home.com> on Sat, 9 Dec 2000 11:00:10 -0700
John, have a good trip back out west. This for your return:
1. Some of which I speak wasn‘t history when I learned it in school , it was
"current events". :
2. The descriptions in the Sharpe series reminds me of the old playground
game of "paper covers rock, rock breaks scissors, scissors cuts paper" round
and round. The point being that all three of the combat arms are necessary -
both then and now.
3. Yes, once the infy square was broken, the cavarly with their curved
sabres that could hack rather than thrust caused a complete slaughter inside
the square. The trooper had to merely lean over slightly and slash down the
whole rank‘ rear.
4. Infantry section and higher formations of today have their origins in
the Napoleonic era or even much earlier. Extended line provides great
firepower to the front, but very little to the flank, none to the rear
diamond formation on defence.......
----- Original Message -----
From: Gow
To:
Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2000 12:04 AM
Subject: Re: Custer
> Damn it Ian, I wrote that and LOOKED at it and said "There‘s some small
> thing off here..." and sent the SOB regardless...thanks for the reminder,
> Donald it is!
>
> My point with the Mounted Rifles was that we really did not have
"Cavalry",
> at least as the Americans saw it, or, indeed, the Brits...we had mounted
> soldiers, whose philosophy of the attack and defence would certainly be
> different from "cavalry"...and no doubt leads to our slogging, if gallant,
> infantry heritage through both the World Great? Wars..which again
> addresses the point the questioner made...where are Canada‘s Cavalry
> leaders?
>
> I did not, and do not, claim to be any expert on cavalry. But I did think
> that Sam Steele was a good example of a competent, if not expert,
> cavalryman...would/will debate that but not much else...Canada is not a
> nation of cavalry history/experience...I believe Armour a derivative, some
> notable, national,spirit is there, but "Death or Glory" 17th Lancers is
> not QUITE what Canadians are about...or so I fondly believe...
>
> In spite of Stockwell Day, just to press that button...laughs, quietly
>
> IIRC, the 5th was out of Yorkton, but will not push the point, that was a
> lot of years ago. Will ask about it next week I‘ll be back to the frozen
> plains God Bless Them! cooking and caring for my parents...
>
> Now to catch you in a very minor point...in the Sharpe series, fighting
out
> of Spain, an infantry square is beaten in a cavalry charge led or followed
> by our hero Major Sharpe...and indeed Kipling writes of how the "Fuzzies"
> broke the British square without Arty..and in that series, as in the
> "Flashman" series, the writer pointed out that if you nudged the lance
> point aside, the trooper was defenseless...certainly, no arm of any army
can
> contract to a defensive position that "cannot be beaten"...though some
have
> tried, with varying degrees of success, though almost all lost it in the
> end, without relief...
>
> Will now disappear from the web for a week or so...
>
> On the road again ...
>
> Albeit, Mike, if you are reading this, in rather nice hotels...
>
> But thanks for the compliment, Ian, there are likely few that could reach
> into history and debate my point or points, and you are one of them...
>
> John
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ian Edwards"
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2000 1:21 AM
> Subject: Re: Custer
>
>
> > John from Ian
> >
> > A good summary. Only a couple of small nit-picks:
> >
> > 1. Wasn‘t "David" Strathcona. He was originally Donald A. Smith, later
> Lord
> > Stratchcona.
> > 2. Mounted Rifles were not cavalry. They didn‘t fight as cavalry. As I
> > mentioned in a recent post the horse was only used to get them rapidly
> close
> > to battle where the men dismounted and fought as infantry - light
infantry
> > or as Rifles skirmishers to be more exact. One of Canada‘s most
> > knowlegeable cavalrymen was a member of Toronto‘s Dennison sp? family
> > first name escapes me founder etc of what is now the GGHG and wrote
The
> > Book on MR tactics, recognized wordwide in its time.
> >
> > The 1st to 5th Canadian Mounted Rifles in WW1 fought as infy bns as you
> > said. Additionally, The 5th Canadian Infantry Battalion known as the
> > "Western Cavalry", and IIRC mostly from your old home town of Saskatoon
> > along with the 6th Cdn Inf. Battn Fort Gary Horse were formed to be
> > cavalry but saw service only as infy. Possibly others raised by cav.
regts
> > and saw service as infy.
> >
> > Canada did have one brigade of calvary that served in WW1, composed of
> > squadrons from various cavarly regiments and it fought as cavalry on the
> > Western Front whenever trenches, barbed wire and MGs didn‘t get in the
> > way.
> >
> > As a reader of the Sharpe series Napoleonic Wars that you mentioned
> > recently you will appreciate that a square of infantry is impervious to
> > cavalry. The horse just won‘t penetrate the barriers of infantry fixed
> > bayonets. But as our gunners would be quick to point out, the square was
> > vulnerable to arty fire as the square was not able to move very fast if
at
> > all. The Sharpe series the books - the TV series was terrible, at least
> the
> > one I watched very enlightening if one can get past the melodramatic
> plot.
> > But like all series, should be read in sequence. Now, a calvaryman with
a
> > lance instead of a sabre/saber, well ....
> > but as usual I digress.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Gow
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 8:05 PM
> > Subject: Re: Custer
> >
> >
> > > I‘ll try and respond to that one, though cavalry is not my forte...
> > >
> > > Canada, with an entirely different type of westward expansion, and
> > treatment
> > > of its native Indians, evolved very differently than the USA. Our
> > > philosophy of an army was more to the concept in the 1800‘s until
well
> > into
> > > the 1900‘s that the Permanent Force was there in small number as a
> > training
> > > cadre for a militia that would form the Regiments and fight.
> > >
> > > We did not have a Civil War, so no actions there for any would be spur
> > > winners.
> > >
> > > The LDSH was formed in Calgary by Lord David Strathcona for service in
> > South
> > > Africa, and it, of course was horsed. It was commanded by Sir Sam
> Steele,
> > a
> > > Commissioner with the NWMP, later our RCMP, who, in fact were the
> > "monitors"
> > > of the settlers and the natives as western Canada evolved, and the
Yukon
> > > Gold Rush etc happened. These were some pretty fine horsemen and
> > "cavalry"
> > > as we knew it leaders..no last stand or bloody battles against
> > equivalent
> > > forces to compare them to US history, so they are perhaps not so well
> > known.
> > > but in true terms of efficiency, not many natives or settlers were
> killed
> > > or wrongly treated under the monitoring of the RCMP
> > >
> > > We did, of course, have the Riel Rebellion in 1885, and Canadian
cavalry
> > > "units" were formed and employed in this campaign, but most of it was
> > > pursuit phase, ambush etc, up to a more or less set piece battle at
> > Batoche,
> > > where the under-armed natives were firing stones and nails due to a
lack
> > of
> > > proper ammunition.
> > >
> > > Cavalry units the Canadian Mounted Rifles etc were formed for WWI,
but
> > by
> > > the time they were trained, shipped over and ready for deployment,
there
> > was
> > > no use for them in a cavalry role, and a crying need for infantry.
> > >
> > > If one were to say that the current Armour contingent is an externsion
> of
> > > cavalry, well we had Worthington, and you might take a look at
Simmonds
> as
> > > well for cavalry like thinking, but Canadian troops were predominantly
> > used
> > > in frontal attack like Caan to break the linch pin of the defence,
> while
> > > US Generals like Patton got the glory assignments that "let the dogs
> > > out"..likewise, it was Canadians that got assigned the polger country
> > > battles in Holland, where it was infantry/artillery shows, as Armour
> > lacked
> > > the ability to maneuver, due to terrain.
> > >
> > > Certain units, such as the BCD‘s, performed exceptionally in WWII in a
> > > variety of battles in the Italian campaign, going through normous
> > obstacles
> > > and problems to support an sustain our infanteers, but the battles in
> > Italy
> > > are not the 1 reading material either, and the commander would only
> have
> > > been a LCol...we sure did not have many Armour Generals..at least in
> > command
> > > positions...
> > >
> > > All this being said, the Armoured component in Canada today and
through
> > the
> > > past thirty odd years that I‘ve had personal knowledge of them, are
fit
> to
> > > be judged on a par with any in the world. Their equipment is
expensive
> > and
> > > maintenance heavy, and as a result they tend not to be showcased so
> much,
> > > but they have a pretty solid idea of the job.
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > > Okay, now the rest of you can jump on my head...
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From:
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 9:32 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Custer
> > >
> > >
> > > > I have to admit that I‘m very impressed by the depth of knowledge my
> > > brethren
> > > > on the list possess about GA Custer. I‘m comfortable using the term
> > > > "brethren" because Joan hasn‘t commented on this topic! In so many
> > ways,
> > > > Custer defines what was good and flawed about the U.S. Cavalry
during
> > its
> > > > adulthood.
> > > > Now, I‘d love to improve my meager grasp of Canadian military
> > history...Is
> > > > there a legendary cavalryman in Canada‘s past that John Ford
> overlooked,
> > > and
> > > > is therefore anonymous to us Yanks?
> > > > Dave Hall
> > > > --------------------------------------------------------
> > > > NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> > > > to majordomo@CdnArmy.ca from the account you wish to
> > > > remove, with the line "unsubscribe army-list" in the
> > > > message body.
> > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------------
> > > NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> > > to majordomo@CdnArmy.ca from the account you wish to
> > > remove, with the line "unsubscribe army-list" in the
> > > message body.
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> > to majordomo@CdnArmy.ca from the account you wish to
> > remove, with the line "unsubscribe army-list" in the
> > message body.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@CdnArmy.ca from the account you wish to
> remove, with the line "unsubscribe army-list" in the
> message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@CdnArmy.ca from the account you wish to
remove, with the line "unsubscribe army-list" in the
message body.
John, have a good trip back out west. This for your return:
1. Some of which I speak wasn‘t history when I learned it in school , it was
"current events". :
2. The descriptions in the Sharpe series reminds me of the old playground
game of "paper covers rock, rock breaks scissors, scissors cuts paper" round
and round. The point being that all three of the combat arms are necessary -
both then and now.
3. Yes, once the infy square was broken, the cavarly with their curved
sabres that could hack rather than thrust caused a complete slaughter inside
the square. The trooper had to merely lean over slightly and slash down the
whole rank‘ rear.
4. Infantry section and higher formations of today have their origins in
the Napoleonic era or even much earlier. Extended line provides great
firepower to the front, but very little to the flank, none to the rear
diamond formation on defence.......
----- Original Message -----
From: Gow
To:
Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2000 12:04 AM
Subject: Re: Custer
> Damn it Ian, I wrote that and LOOKED at it and said "There‘s some small
> thing off here..." and sent the SOB regardless...thanks for the reminder,
> Donald it is!
>
> My point with the Mounted Rifles was that we really did not have
"Cavalry",
> at least as the Americans saw it, or, indeed, the Brits...we had mounted
> soldiers, whose philosophy of the attack and defence would certainly be
> different from "cavalry"...and no doubt leads to our slogging, if gallant,
> infantry heritage through both the World Great? Wars..which again
> addresses the point the questioner made...where are Canada‘s Cavalry
> leaders?
>
> I did not, and do not, claim to be any expert on cavalry. But I did think
> that Sam Steele was a good example of a competent, if not expert,
> cavalryman...would/will debate that but not much else...Canada is not a
> nation of cavalry history/experience...I believe Armour a derivative, some
> notable, national,spirit is there, but "Death or Glory" 17th Lancers is
> not QUITE what Canadians are about...or so I fondly believe...
>
> In spite of Stockwell Day, just to press that button...laughs, quietly
>
> IIRC, the 5th was out of Yorkton, but will not push the point, that was a
> lot of years ago. Will ask about it next week I‘ll be back to the frozen
> plains God Bless Them! cooking and caring for my parents...
>
> Now to catch you in a very minor point...in the Sharpe series, fighting
out
> of Spain, an infantry square is beaten in a cavalry charge led or followed
> by our hero Major Sharpe...and indeed Kipling writes of how the "Fuzzies"
> broke the British square without Arty..and in that series, as in the
> "Flashman" series, the writer pointed out that if you nudged the lance
> point aside, the trooper was defenseless...certainly, no arm of any army
can
> contract to a defensive position that "cannot be beaten"...though some
have
> tried, with varying degrees of success, though almost all lost it in the
> end, without relief...
>
> Will now disappear from the web for a week or so...
>
> On the road again ...
>
> Albeit, Mike, if you are reading this, in rather nice hotels...
>
> But thanks for the compliment, Ian, there are likely few that could reach
> into history and debate my point or points, and you are one of them...
>
> John
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ian Edwards"
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2000 1:21 AM
> Subject: Re: Custer
>
>
> > John from Ian
> >
> > A good summary. Only a couple of small nit-picks:
> >
> > 1. Wasn‘t "David" Strathcona. He was originally Donald A. Smith, later
> Lord
> > Stratchcona.
> > 2. Mounted Rifles were not cavalry. They didn‘t fight as cavalry. As I
> > mentioned in a recent post the horse was only used to get them rapidly
> close
> > to battle where the men dismounted and fought as infantry - light
infantry
> > or as Rifles skirmishers to be more exact. One of Canada‘s most
> > knowlegeable cavalrymen was a member of Toronto‘s Dennison sp? family
> > first name escapes me founder etc of what is now the GGHG and wrote
The
> > Book on MR tactics, recognized wordwide in its time.
> >
> > The 1st to 5th Canadian Mounted Rifles in WW1 fought as infy bns as you
> > said. Additionally, The 5th Canadian Infantry Battalion known as the
> > "Western Cavalry", and IIRC mostly from your old home town of Saskatoon
> > along with the 6th Cdn Inf. Battn Fort Gary Horse were formed to be
> > cavalry but saw service only as infy. Possibly others raised by cav.
regts
> > and saw service as infy.
> >
> > Canada did have one brigade of calvary that served in WW1, composed of
> > squadrons from various cavarly regiments and it fought as cavalry on the
> > Western Front whenever trenches, barbed wire and MGs didn‘t get in the
> > way.
> >
> > As a reader of the Sharpe series Napoleonic Wars that you mentioned
> > recently you will appreciate that a square of infantry is impervious to
> > cavalry. The horse just won‘t penetrate the barriers of infantry fixed
> > bayonets. But as our gunners would be quick to point out, the square was
> > vulnerable to arty fire as the square was not able to move very fast if
at
> > all. The Sharpe series the books - the TV series was terrible, at least
> the
> > one I watched very enlightening if one can get past the melodramatic
> plot.
> > But like all series, should be read in sequence. Now, a calvaryman with
a
> > lance instead of a sabre/saber, well ....
> > but as usual I digress.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Gow
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 8:05 PM
> > Subject: Re: Custer
> >
> >
> > > I‘ll try and respond to that one, though cavalry is not my forte...
> > >
> > > Canada, with an entirely different type of westward expansion, and
> > treatment
> > > of its native Indians, evolved very differently than the USA. Our
> > > philosophy of an army was more to the concept in the 1800‘s until
well
> > into
> > > the 1900‘s that the Permanent Force was there in small number as a
> > training
> > > cadre for a militia that would form the Regiments and fight.
> > >
> > > We did not have a Civil War, so no actions there for any would be spur
> > > winners.
> > >
> > > The LDSH was formed in Calgary by Lord David Strathcona for service in
> > South
> > > Africa, and it, of course was horsed. It was commanded by Sir Sam
> Steele,
> > a
> > > Commissioner with the NWMP, later our RCMP, who, in fact were the
> > "monitors"
> > > of the settlers and the natives as western Canada evolved, and the
Yukon
> > > Gold Rush etc happened. These were some pretty fine horsemen and
> > "cavalry"
> > > as we knew it leaders..no last stand or bloody battles against
> > equivalent
> > > forces to compare them to US history, so they are perhaps not so well
> > known.
> > > but in true terms of efficiency, not many natives or settlers were
> killed
> > > or wrongly treated under the monitoring of the RCMP
> > >
> > > We did, of course, have the Riel Rebellion in 1885, and Canadian
cavalry
> > > "units" were formed and employed in this campaign, but most of it was
> > > pursuit phase, ambush etc, up to a more or less set piece battle at
> > Batoche,
> > > where the under-armed natives were firing stones and nails due to a
lack
> > of
> > > proper ammunition.
> > >
> > > Cavalry units the Canadian Mounted Rifles etc were formed for WWI,
but
> > by
> > > the time they were trained, shipped over and ready for deployment,
there
> > was
> > > no use for them in a cavalry role, and a crying need for infantry.
> > >
> > > If one were to say that the current Armour contingent is an externsion
> of
> > > cavalry, well we had Worthington, and you might take a look at
Simmonds
> as
> > > well for cavalry like thinking, but Canadian troops were predominantly
> > used
> > > in frontal attack like Caan to break the linch pin of the defence,
> while
> > > US Generals like Patton got the glory assignments that "let the dogs
> > > out"..likewise, it was Canadians that got assigned the polger country
> > > battles in Holland, where it was infantry/artillery shows, as Armour
> > lacked
> > > the ability to maneuver, due to terrain.
> > >
> > > Certain units, such as the BCD‘s, performed exceptionally in WWII in a
> > > variety of battles in the Italian campaign, going through normous
> > obstacles
> > > and problems to support an sustain our infanteers, but the battles in
> > Italy
> > > are not the 1 reading material either, and the commander would only
> have
> > > been a LCol...we sure did not have many Armour Generals..at least in
> > command
> > > positions...
> > >
> > > All this being said, the Armoured component in Canada today and
through
> > the
> > > past thirty odd years that I‘ve had personal knowledge of them, are
fit
> to
> > > be judged on a par with any in the world. Their equipment is
expensive
> > and
> > > maintenance heavy, and as a result they tend not to be showcased so
> much,
> > > but they have a pretty solid idea of the job.
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > > Okay, now the rest of you can jump on my head...
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From:
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 9:32 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Custer
> > >
> > >
> > > > I have to admit that I‘m very impressed by the depth of knowledge my
> > > brethren
> > > > on the list possess about GA Custer. I‘m comfortable using the term
> > > > "brethren" because Joan hasn‘t commented on this topic! In so many
> > ways,
> > > > Custer defines what was good and flawed about the U.S. Cavalry
during
> > its
> > > > adulthood.
> > > > Now, I‘d love to improve my meager grasp of Canadian military
> > history...Is
> > > > there a legendary cavalryman in Canada‘s past that John Ford
> overlooked,
> > > and
> > > > is therefore anonymous to us Yanks?
> > > > Dave Hall
> > > > --------------------------------------------------------
> > > > NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> > > > to majordomo@CdnArmy.ca from the account you wish to
> > > > remove, with the line "unsubscribe army-list" in the
> > > > message body.
> > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------------
> > > NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> > > to majordomo@CdnArmy.ca from the account you wish to
> > > remove, with the line "unsubscribe army-list" in the
> > > message body.
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> > to majordomo@CdnArmy.ca from the account you wish to
> > remove, with the line "unsubscribe army-list" in the
> > message body.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
> to majordomo@CdnArmy.ca from the account you wish to
> remove, with the line "unsubscribe army-list" in the
> message body.
--------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: To remove yourself from this list, send a message
to majordomo@CdnArmy.ca from the account you wish to
remove, with the line "unsubscribe army-list" in the
message body.
