Announcement

**Mike Ventura** · 11-08-2011, 03:29 PM

Re: August 1863 Ordnance Report for 5th District, Dept of MS and East LA, Chalmers Cavalry Brigades

Will - How many men were reported for duty at this time? That would help us understand the ratios of, say, pistols to men.

**rbruno** · 11-08-2011, 03:29 PM

Re: August 1863 Ordnance Report for 5th District, Dept of MS and East LA, Chalmers Cavalry Brigades

The thing that always interests me with these reports and others is that nothing matches up, so what are they actually counting. For instance, there are 538 cavalry saddles in the 2nd brigade and only 506 cavalry bridles. To keep the discussion simple at this point, lets just assume for a minute that there were exactly 538 horses with 538 saddles. What did the other 32 do that didn't have bridles? Civilian? Captured equipment? Looking at the other numerbers, there are 287 gun slings/boots in the 2nd brigade with more then that in long arms. So, what did the guys do with the long arms with no sling/boot? So, if they are only counting issued equipment from the gov't, how do we really know how well equiped this brigade was? I hope this question makes sense.

**Mississippian** · 11-08-2011, 03:51 PM

Re: August 1863 Ordnance Report for 5th District, Dept of MS and East LA, Chalmers Cavalry Brigades

The total number of men wasn't on the report, so I had to do some digging. I found in the OR's a return of troops from the Dept of Miss and East LA dated August 20th 1863 this report shows that Chalmers had at that time 142 Officers and 1,081 men in his command. Hope this helps.

Will MacDonald

**Mike Ventura** · 11-08-2011, 04:01 PM

Re: August 1863 Ordnance Report for 5th District, Dept of MS and East LA, Chalmers Cavalry Brigades

Assuming the combined number of men from the OR, officers + men = 1,223 and adding the number of pistols of all kinds from both brigades' CSRs = 386, that shows 31.6%, or less than one in three carried a pistol.

This is pretty consistent with other reports that we've seen for western CS cav. For our purposes, a lot of us need to start leaving the pistols at home!

**Forrestcavalryman** · 11-08-2011, 08:41 PM

Re: August 1863 Ordnance Report for 5th District, Dept of MS and East LA, Chalmers Cavalry Brigades

So, what did the guys do with the long arms with no sling/boot?

Wouldn't be too diffIcult. I've never used a boot.

For our purposes, a lot of us need to start leaving the pistols at home!

YES! It's one less thing to clean!

538 cavalry saddles in the 2nd brigade and only 506 cavalry bridles

That one puzzles me. Why would you exclude civilian bridles, but not civilian longarms, such as shotguns?

**Ken Knopp** · 11-08-2011, 09:47 PM

Re: August 1863 Ordnance Report for 5th District, Dept of MS and East LA, Chalmers Cavalry Brigades

Will,
This is a fine report (THANK YOU!) and a rarity due to the fact early to mid war returns for western CS cavalry in this detail are difficult to find. I have used this same report in some of my articles. I am enclosing a bit more detailed biographical information about this cavalry command from my copy as well as other sources. Perhaps it will paint a better picture of the units noted in the report. See below after my rambling......

Oh, and Will, thank you for bringing this to the AC!. This is the kind of information that we need to study to better understand the times and to flesh out our portrayals. Rob, brings up some very good, albeit it very difficult questions to answer when examining these reports. It is these type questions that NEED be examined and �maybe� answered to better understand the �what�, �how�s� and �why�s� of Confederate equipment.

For example: The first question is....How was the equipment reported? By whom? Were they consistent in their statistical reporting? Were they listing civilian (anything that was useable) or ONLY military issue? Was it Federal or Confederate issue or both?

Second: I note that the Chalmer�s 1st Brigade.....had 653 officers and men with no mention of how many horses in the command. OK, lets generally assume there were ten companies with three commissioned officers each, then regimental and brigade officers or approx a total of 45-50 commissioned officers leaving approx 600 �effective� enlisted men (allow me to round the numbers off). So, what does this tell us?...

- There were only 519 long arms or only 87% (an officer would not normally carry a long arm)

- 24 sabers. Were these for officers only (probably) or perhaps a saber company (or escort company?) No way to know for sure.

- But....212 Saber belts. Again, some officers but how many enlisted men? Captured Federal or Confederate issue? Interestingly there were only 170 waist belts. So then, how does a man have a cartridge box and pouch but without a waist belt? Hmmm, brings up more questions....

- There were 600 cap pouches (great!) But only 497 Cart Boxes or 83% of enlisted men BUT!...402 Cartridge Box �belts�. Hey! That means �infantry� type equipments! Did some of them carry their pouches on the cart. box belt?

- So what about the other�effective� men? How did they carry their cartridges, caps, etc.? Were some of these assigned to the brigade wagons? Or were they dismounted �wagon dogs�? So many questions!

- There is a shortage of carbines slings but they approximate the number of Sharp�s and Halls (is there a correlation here?) Then what about shotguns? That would suggest the remaining long arms were all carried across the back or pommel of the saddle...or does it? There are 147 infantry rifle slings but at least 180 long arms (excluding shot guns). Does that mean many were carried �in hand�?

- There were apparently plenty of saddles but of what patterns? Any civilian? Were some Fed. captured or CS issue? Wish we had the number of horses. That is always interesting.

- Yes, Bridles were a problem. Are they including only �military� issue types or civilian. How does an �effective� man march or even get close to the fight if he has no bridle with which to ride his horse???

- Canteens and straps: Only 254 for 653 men. This is difficult to understand and explain but I have attempted to do so in one of my articles "A Shortage of Haversacks and Canteens in Western CS Cavalry?". See my web site.

- The report does not show it but I have seen similar with very small percentages of saddle blankets. How long can you expect to ride your horse without a blanket? Oh, maybe they meant only saddle blankets and not sleeping blankets being used as saddle blankets. I cannot explain this.

- AND, we have no record of the clothing which can be another huge �eye-opener�!

* Believe it or not, this report is fairly typical. I have in my files and have examined dozens of these reports. Later war reports usually illustrate somewhat better numbers and the eastern cavalry reports suggest the ANV cavalry were typically better armed and equipped but in each case the truth is it was sporadic and fluid even among reports of the same units but different time periods.

So, by examining these closely one can see some great disparities that only open up a whole can of questions that I cannot answer yet require a lot more study. Still, in this case as in others the reports also give us a far better snap shot of how a typical cavalryman appeared, how he was armed, equipped, etc. What he �did NOT have�! In short, we reenactors greatly �over-do� the arms and equipments. When one cross examines these reports the biggest shocker and TRUTH is that the typical cavalryman was far less armed and equipped than modern history, reminiscences and nostalgia factually provide us.

Will, love this kind of stuff! It is this kind of study that I think most important in our hobby. Thank you for sharing it. Let me humbly add that I do not bring up these questions to display my knowledge or show off. I have spent countless hours trying to make sense of all of this and in the few instances when I can, I have written about it. Yet still, I am usually left perplexed, bewildered and often confused. It is mind boggling! Perhaps someone can help me make better sense of it all. I urge everyone to look at these numbers and offer up some suggestions. What do YOU think about these questions of arms and equipment usage??? Can someone help me? What are your opinions?

Ken R Knopp

Confederate Saddles & Horse Equipment

https://www.confederatesaddles.com

Confederate saddles and horse equipment

--------------------------------------------------------------

Arms & Equipments
FIFTH MILITARY. DISTRICT., DEPT. MISS. AND EAST LOUISIANA
CHALMER�S CAVALRY
August 1863 (Hdqtrs. Grenada Mississippi)
Ordnance Returns prepared by Lt. John T Buck, Ordnance Officer for Brig. Gen J.R. Chalmers.

Edited and Compiled By Ken R. Knopp

SOURCE: This information was gleaned from an original Ordnance Return found in the personal file of J.T Buck, Ordnance Officer for Gen. Chalmers (April 1863 to Dec 17, 1863.), National Archives. Military Service Records, General and Staff Officers, (Micro film) M331.

EDITOR�s NOTES: In February 1863 Brig. Gen. Chalmers was assigned command of the Fifth District Mississippi and East Louisiana comprising the areas of north Mississippi. The forces there consisted of various scattered and detached cavalry regiments and companies consisting of the 2nd Missouri Cavalry, 1st Miss. Partisan Rangers; Waul�s Texas Legion Batt., 2nd Arkansas Cav.; four companies of the 7th Tennessee Cav. (a.k.a. 1st Tenn.); Faulkner�s Ky. Cav. Batt.; the 2nd Miss. Partisan Rangers and various other Mississippi Partisan Rangers Companies (Mitchell�s, Smith�s Dunn�s and McGuirk�s). Chalmer�s was not sufficiently organized to seriously hamper Grierson�s Raid in April 1863 however, by May and June he was able to assist and coordinate with the Confederate forces in Vicksburg and Jackson to protect their northern flank. A few battles and various large scale skirmishes were fought with Federal forces advancing from Memphis through the summer and fall of 1863 until Chalmer�s forces were consolidated with that of Lt. Gen. Forrest in January of 1864.
*Chalmer�s commanded three Brigades. Only two are noted in the report. Missing is the 3rd Brigade consisting of the 2nd Mississippi Partisan Rangers; Dunn�s Mississippi Partisan Rangers and McGuirk�s Mississippi Partisan Rangers.

FIRST BRIGADE: 653 Effective Men (Col. Robert McCullock, cmding. 2nd Missouri Cavalry, 1st Miss. Partisan Rangers; Waul�s Texas Legion Batt.). Unarmed Men: 52

SECOND BRIGADE: 594 Effective Men (Co. W. F. Selmons, cmdg. 2nd Arkansas Cav.; four companies of the 7th Tennessee Cav. (a.k.a. 1st Tenn.); Faulkner�s Ky. Cav. Batt.; W.R. Mitchell�s Miss. Partisan Rangers and J.W. Smith�s Miss. Partisan Rangers) Unarmed men: 19

Total: 1,247 Effective Men. Total arms 1,157. Total unarmed men 71.

ARTILLERY ARMS:
(Chalmers had no artillery noted in the above return although a post war reminiscence by a staff officer notes a section of artillery in June of 1863)

**Mississippian** · 11-08-2011, 10:41 PM

Re: August 1863 Ordnance Report for 5th District, Dept of MS and East LA, Chalmers Cavalry Brigades

Ken,

You mention clothing, there is a jacket belonging to one of Chalmers men in the possession of the University of Mississippi in Oxford. He was a member of the 3rd Mississippi Cavalry which was organized in the fall of 1863 from many of the independent companies of cavalry you mention in your post. The trooper was from Lafayette county and was killed outside Atlanta in August 1864. I'll have to find my notes on it.

Will MacDonald

**rbruno** · 11-09-2011, 09:23 AM

Re: August 1863 Ordnance Report for 5th District, Dept of MS and East LA, Chalmers Cavalry Brigades

Ken,
You listed many of the questions that I was thinking and just scraped the surface with my simplified example. The one thought/comment/agree to disagree/more food for thought is that you said that the TRUTH is that the typical cavalryman was far less armed and equipped than modern history, reminiscences and nostalgia factually provide us. I guess the point I would make is that what would be the "typical" cs trooper. What I mean is if we were to use the example of the limited number of sabres accounted for in the report and the possibility of there being an escort company or sabre company in one of these units. So if a group of guys came to an event in the western theater all armed with sabres, would they not be considered typical? Same goes with pistols and long arms. Could a company or even an regiment be completely outfitted with a revolver and long arm and be in the western theater? You are exactly right that more research is always in order. Now the next question is where to go for that research? I guess the next step would be down to the regimental reports, maybe to company officer request forms, down to hopefully a soldiers letters/diary that could shed more light on the subject. I have often had this discussion with people and there are advantages to both. When portraying a "typical" western or eastern trooper, that typical soldier might be very different from unit to unit much less company to company in an individual regiment or battalion. I personally like researching the individual unit to find out what was "typical" in that unit. But, that could limit me in other impressions. Anyway, I don't want to get too far off the subject. This is some great information to what was found in these units and glad it was posted for our discussion.

**Mike_Schramm** · 11-09-2011, 10:16 AM

Re: August 1863 Ordnance Report for 5th District, Dept of MS and East LA, Chalmers Cavalry Brigades

I am struck by the "to be issued" list.

71 unarmed men and 118 long arms.

It looks like there was a conscious decision to NOT draw sabers (21 in the field, 208 in supply), it could have been the same for the pistols (one more thing to clean, doesn't work worth spit, etc)

**volcav** · 11-09-2011, 10:49 AM

Re: August 1863 Ordnance Report for 5th District, Dept of MS and East LA, Chalmers Cavalry Brigades

Originally posted by Forrestcavalryman View Post

That one puzzles me. Why would you exclude civilian bridles, but not civilian longarms, such as shotguns?

My thought on this is that you would exclude civilian tack from the report because you want the government to provide you with issued equipment. But you'd include the civilian arms because you want the government to provide ammunition for those arms.

**Ken Knopp** · 11-09-2011, 08:55 PM

Re: August 1863 Ordnance Report for 5th District, Dept of MS and East LA, Chalmers Cavalry Brigades

Rob, I think you hit on the central question...."What is typical?" The obvious answer is that it varied in the ANV, AOT, TM, coastal and interior duty stations, it varied among regiments, battalions, it varied among companies, and even individuals and, all of this varied widely along the time lines of the war, even the seasons ...among all of the above. A trooper or units proximity to manufacturing centers, access to supply lines, captured Federals, etc. also had an significant impact. These reports are wonderful in that they provide alot of information but also present alot of questions as duly noted.
For us, "typical" SHOULD be a target impression whether it be a unit or individual and mix in a time frame or battle event. One can be generic of course, however, less is best and simple is better. In short, I think these records clearly tell us that in general, we should stay away from "typical" as exemplified by what we see at most reenactments.....a fully accoutered (cart, box, cap box, pistol box, saber belt, carb. sling, canteen, haversack- most of it Federal issue), heavily armed (carbine, pistol (s), saber), knee high boots, spurs, great coat, Federal Mac with bags, yankee saddle blanket, etc. etc. As a group certainly and some pieces individually- these are "reenactorisms"!
How? Examine your kit. Who or what are you trying to portray? Research that and build your kit in detail around that. Now, ask yourself,....do I really need a pistol? Ok, maybe a simple (Fed or CS) infantry cartridge box & belt will be fine, brogans are lighter and cheaper than boots (most reenactor boots are crap anyway). Less stuff is cheaper and easler to keep up with and clean (a thought not lost upon the men that we portray)!
Or perhaps, you find your unit did have alot of issue stuff....well OK, work around that but within reason. The main point is let the research of your persona justify your kit. Not the other way around. I think Mark Choate has that in his signature but it is so true. Too often, we build our kits around other reenactors, what is sold by sutler or looks "cool" and often, with a dash of Hollywood influence (admit it!).
I am not being cirtical of the guys here....most are great, all are interested in improving- that's important. No one ever "arrives". We are all learning and growing. The point is to be aware, do some research and....evolve! You will find that your evolution is trully the "fun" of this hobby.

Ken R Knopp

**IowaYank** · 11-09-2011, 10:33 PM

Re: August 1863 Ordnance Report for 5th District, Dept of MS and East LA, Chalmers Cavalry Brigades

About the lacking of bridles, maybe these uncounted bridles are actually combination halter/bridles and they considered them just halters? I see they don't make any mention of number of halters in the report.

**rbruno** · 11-10-2011, 09:24 AM

Re: August 1863 Ordnance Report for 5th District, Dept of MS and East LA, Chalmers Cavalry Brigades

Dan, That is a great point. I was too busy reading what was there and not thinking of what wasn't. Why were the halters not counted? Again, more questions with more research. The age old trap with research leading to more question.
Ken, you point is well taken. And I do agree that on this end of the hobby, research drives our impression. This discussion is always good because it helps bring in not only the research we all do, but how we bring that research to our impression. I have been able to find reports and issues of equipment and ammo to drive my impression. For instance, I have found ordnance reports for sharps ammo issued to the 1st Maryland. So, I carry a Sharps. Does that make me a typical ANV cavalry trooper? Probably not becuase of the large number of arms in the service and the different reports and ammo issues for muzzle loaders and other arms. I, over the years, have built up enough stuff that I can adapt my impression a couple different ways depending on the event we do. I have to say this is a luxury (or maybe a curse when I think of the money I have tied up in the "hobby") of being able to do that. Anyway, again the information presented is great and always leads to a great discussion.

Announcement

Announcement

August 1863 Ordnance Report for 5th District, Dept of MS and East LA, Chalmers Cavalry Brigades

August 1863 Ordnance Report for 5th District, Dept of MS and East LA, Chalmers Cavalry Brigades

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment