Tweet
Link Straps, the research continues
One of the necessary pieces of equipment to be an effective cavalry reenactor is the notorious Link Strap. Without which, one cannot engage dismounted and participate in recreated moments like Buford’s stand at Gettysburg, East Cavalry Field, Trevillion Station and many more. But as our previous video suggested, the link strap was not as common as portrayed in the reenacting community today.
I can still feel the excitement at my first reenactment where we galloped in tight formations onto the far left flank on an already hot battlefield. The commander ordered “Front-Into-Line” and quickly barked another order that put me in the moment…”Prepare to fight…”, I knew what was coming next, as a rear rank Number 2 man, I reigned my horse back and waited for the action command of “On-Foot”! Having practiced this maneuver hundreds of times, I efficiently dismounted, hooked up my saber, took my link strap from my horse’s halter and clipped it to my No. 3 man and scampered off to the skirmish line.
It may not seem much to many, but that moment hooked me into this hobby. I have since tried to be as accurate and effective with my drill as possible. However, through much study and research, I have found that the “required” piece of equipment may not have been that commonplace.
Through this research, I have developed two missions in my reenacting hobby that I am trying to make commonplace. One of those missions is to make tying reins MORE common than using link straps. I feel with enough training and done correctly, it offers more flexibility to a regiment, and of course, more authenticity.
In this quest, I have acquired all the Ordnance Returns from the National Archives and have been putting the data in a seemingly never-ending spreadsheet to one day make analysis much easier. However, having completed the US Regular Cavalry Regiments, I find some peculiar trends that supports the idea that Link Straps were not commonplace.
Raw Data:
Using the organized returns available at the National Archives the following use is the numbers of Link straps for each regiment:
When looking at the raw data each regiment arguably only outfitted 30% of its regiment with link straps. One thing that is interesting to note is that I held an assumption that links became more popular as the war progressed, thus making it more NUG for late war events. However, using the data from the US Regular Cavalry, the opposite actually is true.
As you can see from the preceding graphs, all of the US Regular Cavalry started with large numbers of links which quickly reduced in number to near zero numbers. One exception to this rule is that the US Army conducted a large reorganization and resupply throughout 1864. And for most of the units, including the US Regular Cavalry Regiments, there was a jump of equipment numbers during this time. However, they also seem to quickly trail off again.
One of the gaps as you can see, is that the data from the end of the war is not present. Thus, I cannot say with certainty how common links were at the Appomattox Campaign.
I cannot help but to speculate why the numbers of links reduced so drastically and quickly once being issued them. Using my own experience and insight, I would like to suggest that many of them broke, tore, ripped or were otherwise damaged beyond repair; only to be tossed aside. I can see veterans telling troopers to “throw away” that piece of gear to simply go to the tried and true method of tying the reins.
Other supporting evidence can be seen (or not seen) in the drill manuals of the time. The two main manuals of the time were Poinsett’s and Cooke’s. Both manuals train troopers to tie the reins and mention nothing about the link strap or linking horses together. In fact, only three supplementary (one of which is CS published) training manuals discuss the link strap and how to use it. In all three manuals, they copy McClellan’s drill manual for dismounted skirmishing. Published in 1862, it does specify that all cavalry troopers should be issued with a link strap, but it seems as if they originally were in 1862, but did not get replacement straps and therefore went back to tying reins.
The conversation of whether it is still safe or possible for weekend warriors to tie reins on a regular basis is outside the scope of this discussion but must also be brought up as safety of the horse and rider are paramount. But as a teaser to future conversations, “Safety” has been used to much and has allowed the hobby to make excuses for things that are simply inconvenient vs. unsafe.
Conclusion:
The US Regular Cavalry only had an average of 20%-30% outfitted with link straps (when freshly outfitted). While I understand these are only 6 regiments out of the more than 150+ regiments that fought on the US side during the war, I feel it is a good representation on what was normal or expected. After all, it was the regular US Cavalry. For instance, The 1st US Cavalry were involved in engagements like Williamsburg (13 men lost), Gaines’ Mill (26 men lost), Kelly’s Ford (10 Men Lost), Upperville (51 men lost in sabre charge), Gettysburg (15 men lost), Williamsport, Boonsboro (14 men lost), Brandy Station (15 men lost), Todd’s Tavern (10 men lost), Cold Harbor (7 men lost), Trevillian Station (35 men lost), and many more engagements! It wasn’t like these were regiments banished to guarding rear wagon trains for the whole war.
The data provided above becomes the best advocate for the drilling and practice of tying reins for cavalry units. Not only will this be more accurate and educational to the public (if that is your thing), but also adds another tool to your toolbox (and more flexibility) when our equipment gets broken as those with horses know. Simply put, if you don’t have a link strap, no worries, use your reins!
Comment