CW horses

[10nycav]

Re: CW horses

I did an estimate of Cincinnatti's height based on Grant's known height of 5'9" using that photo. I came up with a height of 16.3 hands for the horse, within an inch of the reported height. Grant would have had no difficulty in mounting a horse of this height as long as he had no hip/knee problems and the horse was trained to stand still. I am barely 5'6" and I can mount a 17.2 hand horse from the ground. I also used to own a TB that was Cincinnatti's height and mounting was not a problem. However I did not like to take hits off of either of those horses!!;) At any rate it gives new meaning to the phrase "getting on your high horse."

Now Phil Sheridan's horse Rienzi, a Black Hawk (a now extinct branch of the Morgan family) was variously reported at being 16 to 17 hands but I think this is not true. Looking at photographs he just does not have the proportions of a tall horse.

Regarding unit preferences for various horse breeds the 1st Massachusetts had Canadians, and the 1st Rhode Island did too. Longacre wrote in Custer and his Wolverines that the Michigan brigade was mounted primarily on Morgans and Canucks (another name for Canadians.) This makes sense because many Canadian horses came through Detroit. Both breeds however, were most definitely Yankee horses--suited for hard work rather than speed, easy keeping, excellent endurance, but not as fast as the Southern horses. They were bred more for the harness than the saddle. You would have seen few in the Southern regiments other than through horse-stealing. The "breed" that was most common among the Yanks was something called simply an "American Horse." It was taller than the Morgan and the Canadian and was basically a mix of the TB and common stock. It was really more of a type than a distinct breed, and varied somewhat among regions but they were still quite recognizable to visitors from outside the US. Some modern quarter horses, though not all, resemble it. Makes sense because all QHs have some TB blood.

Ken Morris

[CJSchumacher]

Re: CW horses

I did an estimate of Cincinnatti's height based on Grant's known height of 5'9" using that photo. I came up with a height of 16.3 hands for the horse, within an inch of the reported height. Grant would have had no difficulty in mounting a horse of this height as long as he had no hip/knee problems and the horse was trained to stand still. I am barely 5'6" and I can mount a 17.2 hand horse from the ground. I also used to own a TB that was Cincinnatti's height and mounting was not a problem. However I did not like to take hits off of either of those horses!!;) At any rate it gives new meaning to the phrase "getting on your high horse."

Now Phil Sheridan's horse Rienzi, a Black Hawk (a now extinct branch of the Morgan family) was variously reported at being 16 to 17 hands but I think this is not true. Looking at photographs he just does not have the proportions of a tall horse.

Regarding unit preferences for various horse breeds the 1st Massachusetts had Canadians, and the 1st Rhode Island did too. Longacre wrote in Custer and his Wolverines that the Michigan brigade was mounted primarily on Morgans and Canucks (another name for Canadians.) This makes sense because many Canadian horses came through Detroit. Both breeds however, were most definitely Yankee horses--suited for hard work rather than speed, easy keeping, excellent endurance, but not as fast as the Southern horses. They were bred more for the harness than the saddle. You would have seen few in the Southern regiments other than through horse-stealing. The "breed" that was most common among the Yanks was something called simply an "American Horse." It was taller than the Morgan and the Canadian and was basically a mix of the TB and common stock. It was really more of a type than a distinct breed, and varied somewhat among regions but they were still quite recognizable to visitors from outside the US. Some modern quarter horses, though not all, resemble it. Makes sense because all QHs have some TB blood.

Ken Morris

Ken,

You're quite right regarding ol' Renzi. I've seen him at the Smithsonian and he cannot be taller than 15.2-16 hands. He's on a bit of a platform behind glass...so any guess is an estimate.

I also agree with your assessment of Cincinatti. 16.3 or even 17 is not terribly high. I ride a 17h. Holsteiner and can get on from the ground. Now the only problem and what most people here don't realize is that while you can mount from the ground, its not always the best thing to do. Mounting a 17h.+ horse, unless you can vault properly (I'd say 90% probably don't) puts tremendous strain on a horses back and withers. I almost always use a block or get a leg up, jockey-style when jumping here in NY.

Now if you want to talk about tall horses...I won't begin to tell you about the 18.2 monster I saw while I was out riding with friends in Middleburg this past weekend!! Talk about needing a leg-up...this guy should have a built in escalator! :wink_smil

[10nycav]

Re: CW horses

Right on that . . . while I COULD mount those horses from the ground if need be, I used a mounting block for the comfort of the horse whenever possible. For general reenacting though, I think it's hard to beat a 15 hand horse for all around convenience and usefulness. The tall ones are great for specialized jobs such as officer (great visibility) and courier (speed/jumping ability).

Ken Morris