|
Post by sloanrodgers on Apr 24, 2008 19:55:14 GMT -5
Stuart, That sounds logical. I have also spoken to many reenactors (American Civil War) who have told me that running with the weapon extended (charge bayonet) get tiresome very quickly, while running at "right shoulder-shift" can be done for long distances comparatively, and over broken terrain. Mark That was my rifle running experience also, altough I was only carrying a nine pound M16, not an cumbersome musket.
|
|
|
Post by marklemon on Apr 24, 2008 19:58:41 GMT -5
When I was going through Aviation Officer's Candidate School in Pensacola FL, in 1979, we performed a 4 mile timed run, mostly along the beach, while carrying an M-1 Garand at "port arms." I can truthfully say that pain was given a new meaning on that day.
|
|
|
Post by tmdreb on May 1, 2008 22:13:11 GMT -5
I find it interesting that in Scott's 1830 manual, the rear rank is advised to "take care to avoid touching the men, who are in front of them, with their bayonets" after the command "charge-bayonets" is given. So, the rear rank is apparently holding their arms at the same position as the front rank.
|
|
|
Post by stuart on May 2, 2008 0:40:22 GMT -5
Stuart, That sounds logical. I have also spoken to many reenactors (American Civil War) who have told me that running with the weapon extended (charge bayonet) get tiresome very quickly, while running at "right shoulder-shift" can be done for long distances comparatively, and over broken terrain. Mark That was my rifle running experience also, altough I was only carrying a nine pound M16, not an cumbersome musket. "Cumbersome musket" is a bit of a myth; the India Pattern as carried by most Mexican infantry weighed in at a well balanced 9lb 11oz. As I recall the L1A1 I carried back in the day was about 11lb with a full mag attached
|
|
|
Post by archivist on May 3, 2008 20:38:36 GMT -5
The DRT Library at the Alamo has just acquired some military manuals I'd like you to know about. We have Mexican military manuals from 1825 and 1853 and a Texas Military Manual from 1846ish. The 1825 has been digitized and is currently undergoing some digital enhancement. The 1853 was just purchased. In addition, a private collector has leant us his copy of the 1840 Mexican military manual that we are digitizing. All are welcome to come see them.
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on May 3, 2008 21:42:50 GMT -5
Thanks for the updates, here and elsewhere on the forum, regarding the DRT Library. I am a strong supporter of the Library and have thoroughly enjoyed the hours I have been able to spend there researching various Alamo-related topics. I hope to visit again in the future and always appreciate the friendly, professional and informative staff there.
AW
|
|
|
Post by bobdurham on May 4, 2008 20:48:10 GMT -5
Has anyone worked out the length of front the attacking columns would have taken up? We know roughly how many men were in each column and, according to Sanchez Navarro's plat, it appears that Cos' column, at least, formed in three double-ranked lines. What I was trying to work out is how far Duque's column, for instance, would have stretched out along the 240 feet of the North Wall -- assuming that it also formed in the same relative formation.
|
|
|
Post by stuart on May 5, 2008 3:35:32 GMT -5
A rule of thumb I've found to be pretty constant is to allow a metre or yard for each man in the front rank when crossing real ground (as opposed to an asphalt parade ground). Some drill books like to talk about shoulders/elbows touching but this isn't practical. There will be times when its achieved but you also have to allow for intervals between sub-units, so the yard/metre rule holds pretty well
|
|
|
Post by bobdurham on May 5, 2008 5:47:13 GMT -5
Thanks a lot Stuart. Let's see, now . . . Cos' column, according to Sanchez-Navarro's plat, was formed initially in three double-ranked lines. He had approximately 350 men in nine fusilero companies of the Aldama Battalion, three fusilero companies of the San Luis de Potosi Battalion and one cazadore company of the Aldama Battalion. If each of the companies was roughly the same size (35 men), with the cazadore company acting as skirmishers, then the battalion front would have been three companies wide, with a width of 15 men for each company -- that's 15 men in a double-ranked line, allowing for five file closers for each company. So Cos' column would have taken up around a 45 yard front (or 135 feet).
If Duque's column, which was roughly equal in manpower, took up that much frontage and moved against the middle of the North wall, when they reached the wall, there would have been 52 1/2 feet of uncovered wall extending to each flank. That 52 1/2 feet would have been the parts of the wall attacked by Romero's and Cos' columns. Or just about enough for one company's front.
When one considers that I'm talking about a column that was six ranks deep, the situation along the wall before the Mexicans actually made it over was unbelievably congested. When you factor in the added weight of the reserves when they got to the wall . . . Conjures up a picture much more confusing and hellish than I imagined. When they finally poured over the wall "like sheep" -- well, I can see where Joe would have come up with that image!
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Mar 15, 2009 14:11:47 GMT -5
Sorry for jumping into this discussion a year late, but in regards to Mark's original question. When we shot APF we did not at that point have a actual Mexican drill manuel. No one had found one in an archives as of yet (the DRT Library had/has a Mexican War period Light Infantry drill manual). So, we used an 1808 Spanish Drill that yes, was similiar to Scott's. There was considerable discussion on how command of execution would/should be done, and in a later Mexican drill the YA! command was found. Of course, as fate would have it, a couple of years later, we were able to lay hands on an 1828 Mexican Manual, and subsequently, a few other variants and additions turned up (Bruce Winders found one at the MHI Carlisle Barracks). The command of execution, it turns out, is just like in Scott's.
In that particular scene you are asking about, this was done on the directors wishes. Thought it would look better than just having them advance at the shoulder. Same thing happened when we filmed Glory.
KRY
|
|