Ranald S. Mackenzie on the Texas Frontier

[Deleted]

Here goes another book review which few of you will read, fewer will reply, and I forcast none will buy the book.

This covers the 4th Cavalry's operations in TX from about 1873 - 1979.  It is much less detailed than books about the LBH because it covers a greater span of time over a far larger area of operations.  The author died before he could write a work about the 4ths Operations in Sioux country, which is sad.  I am not quite finished with it, but I don't think it will affect my thoughts very much.

Once again, I recommend you read the book to broaden your knowledge of Cavalry Operations in the late 19th Century.

I am just going to point out some differences between the 4th and the 7th and its leaders.

Mackenzie graduated first in his class at West Point, Custer was last.

Mackenzie was probably the best Cavalry commander of the Indian Wars and Custer was probably the worst.

Mackenzie, due his hating to write even official reports, is probably the least well known of the commanders, while Custer tooted his own horn instead of paying attention to business.

Mackenzie apparently was able to generate a better command climate even though he was a stern disciplinarian while Custer's command climate probably makes herding cats look like a sound career move.

Mackenzie trained his troops before starting his campaign, using the winter to do so; we all know that Custer was in DC during the time that could have been used for training and Reno didn't.   (Mackenzie even had his sabers ground to a sharp edge.)

It appears to me, Mackenzie planned his logistics much better than Terry/Custer.

Before his raid across the Mexican border, Mackenzie had his troops place extra ammunition in their uniform pockets, not their saddlebags as a precaution against their being unhorsed and/or separated from them (and their ammunition).  [Note:  This never, ever occurred to me in thinking about the LBH nor would I have thought about it with my attached infantrymen as a Tank-Mech company team commander.]

The book is not in enough detail about particular actions/engagements/battles for me to compare Mackenzie's tactics to Custer's.  Although my opinion if Mackenzie would be a successful commander today while Custer would not.

I am very disappointed that the author died before he could  write about the 4th in the Sioux War.  For that, I guess the only good option is MacKenzie's Last Fight with the Cheyennes



Buy the damn book.

[quincannon]

That's one I will look for and purchase.

Mackenzie was the best in my view too. It was a real loss to the Army, and to the study of tactics applied against the irregular when he became ill and died without recounting is activites against the Plains Indians. He fought the best of the best when he took on the Commanche. The Sioux were choir boys when compaired to them. The Commanche, like none of the rest were so well developed militarily that they could wage a campaign. The others could not. Not even close. Beating them was a sterling accomplishment of arms.

Colt lives up in Commanche Country, and I am sure he could give us all insights into just how difficult that terrain is, especially the Llano Estacao and Palo Duro areas.

There is a novel by the late Terry C. Johnson that covers Mackenzie in the Dull Knife fight Mike. Forget the name, but Johnson's stuff is in the Western novels section of any good bookstore. The thing with Johnson is that he inserts his own fictional character into the story, then writes history. Good stuff, all of them.

I will see if I can find that book name for you.

PS: The Plainsman #11 "A Cold Day In Hell" by Terry C. Johnson. Amazon has it, along with the entire Plainsman series which is incomplete due to Johnson's death from cancer.

[Deleted]

So, a small update. There is about 3 pages briefly covering the actions of the Centennial Campaign. Of course, the 4th was not dispatched till after the LBH.

I at first though the Texas campaign had for more forces allocated to it, but apparently it had abut 46 (perhaps more) of which the majority appeared to be under Mackenzie. I don't think it counts the number from other Regiments operating elsewhere, but still contributing to the campaign. There is no order of battle chart in the book).

Whereas in the North, there was a total of 17 companies in Terry's Column, 21 in Crook's, and 10 under Gibbon, for a total of 48. After the LBH, the number probably swelled.

Terry had the advantage of river transport, but his logistics failed him from the river to the sharp end. Mackenzie looked like his logistics were well taken care of, perhaps due a combination rail and wagon transport. Mackenzie also seemed to be able to stay in the field longer as well as resting his troops, while my impression of the northern campaign was there little or no thought to preserving the force.

[quincannon]

The only one of the three commanders coming out of Dakota and Montana that was at any time during his career worth more than a bucket of spit was Gibbon, and my impression is by 76 he was well past his sell by date.

Crook probably was physically as well, but unlike Terry, Crook had a good mind for inovation. He got whacked on the Rosebud, as the new boy in town, but adapted to the changed set of circumstances and never got whacked again. If you have not read "On The Border With Crook" you should.

Mackenzie thought the problem through before he started. Custer, thought the problem through after he finished, then lied about it in his memoirs.

I think I told you that my daughter, when she was in San Antonio, lived on property that was once part of Mackenzies ranch. If I didn't,I'm tell you now

[Deleted]

Thanks chuck.

[Deleted]

I generally agree. Although I think crook broke down after the rose bud and gave up the field prematurely. Neither he nor Terry planned logistically very well, both beat their commands to the one.

Except at LBH. Then he neither planned, fought, or wrote but everyone else made the writing up for him.