British Infantry vs Cavalry "Marching" Speed

[JMB1943]

My understanding is that British infantry marched (on metalled roads) such that with a 10 min break every 50 min they would average about 3.5 mph.

Given that a horse can be either led or ridden, what was the expected/prescribed "marching" pace for a cavalry unit, ?

Can anyone give chapter & verse of the appropriate regulations ?

Regards,

JMB

[squirrel]

From Cavalry Training 1904 p139:

 

"The rate of walk is 4 miles per hour...

The rate of trot is 8 miles per hour...

The normal rate of gallop is 15 miles per hour...

The rate may be increased at the discretion of the officer in command, or it may be diminished at discretion for any definitive reason. On metalled roads, the pace of the trot should never exceed 8 miles per hour".

 

Without ploughing through all 368 pages of the manual, I would suggest that rests taken on the march would depend on the length of the march, the condition of the horses and also the condition of the men, whether on roads, tracks or cross country etc. Others may know better , of course.

Edited 21 November , 2016 by squirrel

[Ron Clifton]

Squirrel beat me to it! But the speeds were same in the 1912 edition.

 

Ron

[Guest]

It is very slightly more complicated: the Cavalry (and Yeomanry and Mounted Infantry before they adopted the Cavalry Training Manual) had prescribed periods for riding (at a walking pace) and walking dismounted over given distances. The rough idea was that the Cavalry would walk dismounted whenever possible in order to spare the horses. Horse husbandry (I think is the correct term for managing the equine 'asset') was very important to the British and in very sharp contrast to the French, Germans, Austrians,Turks, Singhalese and Standatease, who all rode their nags into the ground, often at the disgust of the British. 

 

It also depended on the climate. Horses require vast amounts of water (relative to its rider) and forage (ditto) and the relative weight/transportation distances were key for obvious logistical reasons,  particularly in the tougher climates of the Side Shows. This is one of the reasons why the Camel Corps was formed.

 

Even on the Western Front, when winter set in the cavalry was effectively stable bound due to its inability to transport the necessary vast amount of forage to wherever the roaming Cavalry Corps might end up. The diaries attest to this as do the casualty stats which effectively dry up during winter. There are accounts from First Ypres of skinny nags gnawing tree bark due to the lack of forage. 

 

Most cavalry regiments kept decent march tables (ditto the infantry) so it would be interesting to compare the two. My understanding is that the Cavalry's key advantage was speed over a short distance rather than a long distance. A man can run down any hairy animal over any long distance simply because the animal can not disperse heat in the way a human can*. Long distance journeys relying on horses required changes of animals. ...  For an epic exaple of horse husbandry and a long march, it is worth reading the 11th Hussars march overland from near Paris to Ypres in Sep-Oct 1914. If memory serves every man and horse made it. 

 

Edit: South Africa is a terribly distressing example of how horses could not cope in tough climates without careful management. The attrition rate would bring tears to anyone's eyes. 

 

MG

 

* I run my dogs long distances every day along our beach. It is interesting to see how they self- manage heat (often running into the sea to cool down) and how they respond to water (I carry water for the dogs) and we have a half-way stop for water at stand-pipe. They could run me into the ground over anything less than a mile. Anything in excess of 3 miles their hair coats and lack of sweat glands begins to tell. I never run them during the summer days before 09:00 as a result. Our typical run is 7 miles and on a cool cloudy day all is fine. On a hot day we often have to run into the sea to cool them down. Being labradors this is not a problem as they are keen on swimming. We also have a riding school that uses the same beach. Talking to the instructors who we collide with daily, they have the same challenges with the horses. This is the same reason why Kalahari man can run down an antelope. Humans have a huge advantage with regards to managing heat. 

Edited 13 December , 2016 by Guest

[Guest]

The later edition of the manual has slightly different guidelines. 

 

Chapter VIII Movements on page 245 of the 1912 Cavalry Training Manual refers; Section 179: Marches.  It also refers to Field Service Regs Part I "Animal Management" which might be worth exploring. 

 

It covers marching in detail. Rate of march was recommended at 'about 5 mph including short halts' but obviously also depended on other factors. 'Only when the tactical situation imperatively demands it should the rate of trot exceed 8 mph'. When trotting, men should rise in the stirrups. No man should quit his stirrups. Men should march on foot whenever circumstances permit. Leading the horses on foot for at least 15 minutes in every hour was a key guideline. In addition, halts of 15 minutes every two hours should be made. When starting, a halt after 15 minutes was recommended to allow saddles to be adjusted. During long marches a halt should be made after 4 hours to water and feed the horses. During short halts girths should be loosened. During long halts the horses should be un-saddled. Horses should be dismounted whenever a halt is made. The last two miles of any march should be always be traversed at a walk. 

 

The manual also goes into other related detail such as when to feed and water animals in preparation of a march. Also the management of shoeing and the necessity to keep farriers at the rear of a colum to do running repairs. It also highlights the methods required to clear narrow defiles and states that halts should never be made on bridges, in a gateway or on a ford etc. 

 

It it states that distances of 20 to 25 miles could be reckoned with and forced marches of 40 to 50 miles could be made occasionally but marches of such length should not be undertaken without urgent reason. 

 

On on the guidelines above, the cavalry would not be mounted for considerable parts of a long march. MG

Edited 22 November , 2016 by Guest

[Ron Clifton]

To put it more briefly, in normal circumstances the answer to JMB's original question is "About the same".

 

Ron

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Ron Clifton said:

To put it more briefly, in normal circumstances the answer to JMB's original question is "About the same".

 

Ron

 

The OP did ask for 'chapter and verse'.

 

I am not sure I would agree that it is 'about the same'. The difference between 4 mph (as per the 1904 Cavalry Training Manual) and 5 mph (as per the 1912 Cavalry Training Manual) is an additional 25% in average speed.  Over long distances such as a 40 mile forced march this made a huge difference. Long stops aside, a Cavalry column marching at 5 mph would arrive in 8 hours. A cavalry column marching at 4 mph would arrive in 10 hours.  From a tactical point of view that is significant, particularly when trying to coordinate arrival with the infantry.  I have no idea why the recommended pace should have changed so significantly between training manuals. Of note; the Yeomanry didn't adopt the 1912 Cavalry Training Manual until Sep 1914, which caused more than a bit of chaos, particularly for those units that had already deployed. 

 

When compared to the infantry's average speed of 3.5 mph, the differences between 4 mph and 5 mph over long marches are obvious. 

 

Separately here is part of the 11th Hussars' epic march across France 116 miles in 8 days.;

 

Table of distance covered during the Advance North of Paris:  
Saturday September 5th CHAMPS - AUBPIERRE                            38 miles to flank; (incidentally their longest march of the whole war)
Sunday September 6th AUBEPIERRE - JOUY LE CHATEL              13 miles to flank; 
Monday September 7th JOUY-LE-CHATEL - LA BOCHETIERE       7½ miles to flank; 
Tuesday September 8th LA BOCHETIERE - MARIE FERME         16½ miles to flank; 
Wednesday September 9th MARIE FERME - LUCY-LE-BOCAGE   9½ miles to flank; 
Thursday September 10th LUCY-LE-BOCAGE - BRENY               11½ miles to flank; 
Friday September 11th BRENY -  BRANGES                                   10 miles to flank; 
Saturday September 12th BRANGES - DHUIZEL                             10 miles to flank.  

 

And some relevant comments from the war diary: 

 

23rd Sep 1914. Reveille at 6:00 am, the first "long lie" we have had since the war commenced.  Seems quite strange not getting up at 3 or 4:00 am.  Spent a delightful day's rest, strolled out every now and again to watch the battle; good view from the top.

 

24th Sep 1914. Another rest day.  Never enjoyed a holiday more in our lives.  Had a good look round all the horses.  The old original Squadron horses have stuck it out far the best.  There is not doubt that very few of the hunt horses were anything like fit, and as we were in the field within a few days of landing, they never really had a chance.  Some of the old-stagers, 15 years old have come out top.

 

Separately, the regimental history "11th Hussars 1908-1934" has an appendix of the distances marched throughout the war. Between 3rd and 11th October the Regiment marched 152 miles, or nearly 17 miles per day (on average). The longest march was 23 miles. In 1916 the Regiment covered 68 miles in four days and in 1917 it marched 197 miles over 9 days of marching (within a 40 day period). When on the march in 1917 they averaged nearly 22 miles a day equating to about 4 hours in the saddle. 

 

I have never really understood how lancers coped with dismounted marches and adjusting their saddles on the march.. The manual states that when dismounted the cavalry had to take the rifles out of their holster, so he had to carry his rifle (presumably slung) and his lance and lead the horse. One assumes when adjusting saddlery it required another lancer to hold the lance, meaning it might take lancers longer to execute some of the basics. My speculation. 

Edited 22 November , 2016 by Guest

[Old Tom]

I recall reading somewhere that the French cavalry were surprised that the Brits did not ride all the time.

[squirrel]

Which is why the French cavalry horses were invariably in such poor condition.

 

From Animal Management 1908 prepared by the Veterinary Department for the General Staff War Office:

"p 137 Halts - A first halt should be made after going one or two miles, to allow the horses to stale; make sure that saddlery and harness is all correct and tighten the girths. It need not be more than a few minutes, but it is a very necessary precaution, more especially if the start is made at dawn when the light is poor and some detail in saddlery may have escaped attention.

Subsequently, a short halt of five to ten minutes should be made hourly and every two to three hours a sufficiently long one, to off-saddle and feed. If it is not possible to off-saddle, girths should be loosened and the saddle raised just off the back, to relieve pressure and allow the circulation of the skin to be restored. When the saddles are removed the horse should be allowed to roll and the back dried. At every halt stirrups should be put up to prevent accidents...and each man should look round his horse and at each shoe."

[Guest]

The history of the Derbyshire Yeomanry has as many comments about the care for horses as it does about the men who rode them. They operated in the stony mountains of Macedonia for a number of years as Corps Cavalry, patrolling daily in some fairly hard conditions. The history spends a fair amount of time explaining the difficulties of horse management. At one stage the regiments' horses and mules had lost so many shoes in that hard conditions that the regiment was effectively immobile. 

 

Separately FSR Part I Operations 1909 (which I think was superseded in 1912 or 1914)

 

 

[JMB1943]

Many thanks to all for the very informative replies and I now have an idea of the pace of a cavalry regiment on the march.

Efforts put into scanning/posting/transcribing the regulations and war diaries are greatly appreciated.

It was interesting to see the comment of relative fitness of those horses that went out on a Saturday morning to follow the hounds compared to the (sometimes much older) "regulars" of the cavalry.  That does parallel the human recruits in 1914-15 who had to be brought up to the required levels of stamina & fitness by route marches. 

A couple of questions occur to me,

1) what was the typical load that a mounted cavalry horse would carry in battle order ?

2) in peacetime (given that familiarity with horses was a plus) were cavalrymen selected any differently than infantry, in terms of height/weight/physique/upper body strength etc ?

Regards,

JMB

 

Edited 22 November , 2016 by JMB1943
typo

[Guest]

Cavalry Training Manual 1912 page 74 footnote:

 

"On service the total weight on a horse's back is more than 17 stone"

[michaeldr]

On 11/21/2016 at 23:31, QGE said:

It also depended on the climate. Horses require vast amounts of water (relative to its rider) and forage (ditto) and the relative weight/transportation distances were key for obvious logistical reasons,  particularly in the tougher climates of the Side Shows.

 

Whilst perhaps not germane to the OP, the following may yet be of interest here

 

The final volume of the OH for Palestine campaigns has some interesting information in its 'Epilogue' under the subtitle 'Achievement of Horses'; see pages 620>

“But it is the work accomplished entirely without water in the pursuit after the Third Battle of Gaza that is really astounding. Horses of all three mounted divisions went 72 hours – three complete days and nights – without water, and did continuous work during that period. The horses of the Lincolnshire Yeomanry hold the record of 84 hours. Those of the Dorsetshire Yeomanry covered 60 miles in 54 hours without water. Horses of the artillery and of the infantry divisional trains had performances as striking during the same period: those of the XX Brigade RHA marching 50 miles in 56 hours, and those of the 54^th Divisional Train 50 miles in 63 hours without water..................................................

The wastage in the whole Force from 31^st October to 31^st December 1917 in horse, mules and donkeys was 10,000, including all battle casualties. Of this figure half, representing 5.75% of the total strength, was a dead loss”

The OH has a large footnote on this giving a table taken from the history of the Veterinary Services (Egypt & Palestine) which includes details of the small amounts of grain & fodder consumed daily.

 

Water was not a problem in late 1918, but the distances covered were nevertheless very impressive: the 5^th Cavalry Division covered 550 miles in 38 days (which period included actions fought at Nazareth, Haifa, Kiswe & Haritan)

Edited 24 November , 2016 by michaeldr

[JMB1943]

MG, thanks for info re horse loaded for service; 17 stone (238 lb) is a fair weight to carry.

 

Michaeldr, those are quite the feats of endurance for an animal that needs a lot of food/water, and I assume that they could not have been carrying the sort of load posted by MG and were probably led. True that the average pace was only about 1 mph, which suggests lengthy rest stops, but w/o any water at all.....Thanks for putting up that historical note in the thread.

 

Regards,

JMB