Correct horses or no horses?

[arthurlee]

Attempting to build an authentic horse drawn artillery battery is difficult at best. Many in my group, working toward authenticity, are looking into purchasing horses to pull our two 6 pounders (we have finally stopped the watches and mirrored sunglasses). Our guns are as authentic as one can get without using authentic guns. they were produced to represent two specific guns purchased for the war. I have been told that that our 1841 napoleon's were in common use for the confederacy. We have little information to go on as to horse breeds and the size of the teams. Any photos, ideas or references would be most welcome. I hope this is posted in the correct place, if not, forgive this recruit.

Artie Maxwell
Cpl.
Battery k
1st Texas
(Shepherd Texas)

[tmattimore]

Does any one in your unit know how to ride postillion? or drive single or pairs. The first consideration for a team is temperment the second is skill level. Do the horses know how to drive? The third is health are they old standardbreds off the track who are stiffeled, foundered, knockneed or otherwise chronicly ill.? the fourth is do the horses have courage or will they spook at white tents ,Flags, marching bands, gunshots. loud noises little kids and crowds. There are others but the very last thing to consider is their breed.Size is a factor the manual called for 900lb and up horses for artillery it should not be hard to find horses in the 1100 lb range.

[Fauxban]

Tom's advice is quite sound. I concur in every particular. That being said, while I'm far from from an equine expert, I've worked with Kent Oestenstad's mounted battery for some years now. Virtually all of our teams are recued/retired racehorses, and used to harness. I've learnt that our horses are only afraid of things that move, and those that don't move!! It seems that there's always some new variety of horse goblin appearing on the field, ones that we never expected. My all time time favourite, besides the yaller dawg runnin' underneath the blue tarpaulin covering the hay, were the the baby strollers & carriages in the rain at Franklin!!!

Please don't make the mistake one group here in South Carolina did. They managed to acquire some ex-Arlington National Cemetary horses. Beautiful, magnificent, docile creatures well used to harness, and commotion, they were HUGE!! And white, and not inclined to celerity, even when prodded. These draft horses had to have oversize tack custom built for them, just as the Army had had to do and simply didn't fit well in the CW mounted artillery role. Big as they were, they simply dwarfed the unit's IIIin Ordnance Rifle and its limber, making the detachemnt in harness appear as if they were drawing a scale gun!!! It was quite comical to look upon, failing as it did to present a PEC/NUG impression. Ya hadda wonder, "Is that gun too small, or are them horses too BIG?"

Everytime I watched them I was reminded of the Confederates who "bought" large numbers of Pennsylvania draft horses on the Gettysburg Campaign, only to have them die in droves very shortly after their "enlistment"... Big and powerful they may have been, but far from sturdy on short fodder while lacking the stamina to pull for days on end in bad weather over awful roads.

[sedlakchristopher]

Artie,

Two good sources to consult, although US manuals, are John Gibbon's Artillerist Manual and also the 1861 or 64 Field Artillery Tactics manual by Gen's Hunt, Barry and French.
They both spell out to some extent what type of horses should be used, Gibbon's more-so than the 61 Manual.
Gibbon's has a whole section devoted to the horse selection.

Although portions of both of these manuals are online at the US Regulars online school website, they don't have the sections on the horse posted yet.
http://www.usregulars.com/nrhome.htm

PS - Tried to private message you, but yours is turned off. If you can't find these books in print, Gibbon's may be difficult, let me know and I'll set you up with copies of what you need.
email me at sedlakchristopher@yahoo.com

Good Luck,
In the process ourselves...

Chris Sedlak

[marine05]

I second Chris' reply. Gibbon's you can find online and download for free. If you print it out...well lets say there's a few hundred pages, but worth the effort. Some bookstores sell it, you might try the Butternut and Blue bookstore at http://www.butternutandblue.com/index.html Jim McLean has a very good selection, nope close relation that we are aware of, we do know each other through a Lincoln Symposium we belong to along with Ed Bearss, Tom Desjardin and a few others.

/R

DJM

[arthurlee]

Great Advice! We were looking at a few large draft horses, Belgians in fact, and am now glad I asked the question. I have three quater horses in the 1100 to 1200 ib range, but like all enthusiastic "beginners" we are getting overly excited. We will do a little more research on harness horses and take our time. I'd rather not make some of the mistakes listed above.

Thanks to all,
Artie Maxwell
Cpl, 1st Texas, Battery K
Shepherd Texas

[Bob 125th NYSVI]

As a teamster I can tell you that there are a number fo things you need to look for.

Temperament, temperament, temperament. You want quiet middle aged horses for a number of reason. One, young horses right off the track (3-5) aren't finished growing yet also they are trained to go FAST with very light loads. Both are incompatiable with what you are doing with your guns unless you are portraying a horse battery. Older horses have learned that rest and standing in the traces is a good thing. They have also developed most of their non-health related bad habits by the time they are 7-8. Young horses can develop new ones at the drop of a hat.

Draft horses are COMPLETELY inappropriate because in the last century or so they have been bred up in size. A 'large' Percheron in 1900 would have been about 1400 pounds, today they'd haul you away for not feeding any percheron that size. Furthermore even though the south did appropriate draft horses during their two northern invasions they found them unsuited for artillery work and a strain on the logistic systems for the amount of fodder they consumed.

Regular breeds that will work are Morgans and standardbreds. Both breeds are good for harness work. Morgans being a little shorter are actually better because they get better 'draft' (the amount of power an animal can bring to bear on a load is directly related to the angle of the pole flatter is better) on whatever they are pulling.

There should be no more than an inch or two difference in height between the team members (off and near horses). Not all horses have to be the same height but each team should be. This allows them to equally share the load without too much wear on their bodies from the harness. A good teamster knows how to adjust harness properly but based on the question I'm assuming you don't have an experienced teamster in the unit.

Get TRAINED horses and see them driven and have your driver drive them. Show up at the seller's place unexpectedly to drive them a second time if you are interested. There are all kinds of things a seller can do to a horse to make them seem acceptable if he knows you are coming. If the seller claims the horse can do something or is something (dead broke being a common term) make them prove it right then and there or discount what they say.

See if you can bring a powder charge with you to set off around the horse. A spooked horse towing a cannon is NOT something you want carreening around a reenactment.

Ask to talk to BOTh the seller's vet and farrier to see if they feel that the horse is capable of doing what you want it to do. Have an independent vet (NOT the seller's vet) examine the horse for general health. You may want an independent farrier to look at the animal too.

Finally you will need at LEAST half as much animal in weight as the total weight of your limber and cannon loaded for bear with riders on it. That is if the total weight of everything they are pulling is 3000 pounds you need at least 1500 pounds of horse in reasonable condition.

Finally if you do get a team of horses board them somewhere where they are together and OUTSIDE all the time. They will be more easier to handle this way and calmer. I have a team I can leave in the field for 6 months and when I take them out they act as if they were worked yesterday. Horses that live together in a natural enviorment will be healthier, more willing and quieter to work with. The worst thing man ever did to a horse was invent the stall. And DON'T grain them unless they are working consistantly, it can be like feeding surgar to a 6 year old kid. They are designed to live on grass, as long as it is well balanced and they can get enough of it they'll be fine.

As to my bonifides. 16 years driving draft teams (up to 4 in hand) for educational, work, competition and pleasure purposes. I have owned horses for 24 years and currently own 39 with 8 of them being driving animals with different levels of experience.

[Russell Huffman]

A bit of advice i would give is to go out with a horse artillery unit and ride ,it is a different world than anything in re-enacting .it is very dangerous if not done with experience .and is still a adrenaline rush that cant be matched.the team i work with is all standardbred ex-racers they seem to have the best temperment to me.



Russell Huffman
1st Kentucky cavalry & Horse Artillery

[hoppes9]

Make sure your crew is well trained and experienced with the horses. I see too many people show up at events and jump up on whatever horse the guy with the big trailer provides them. These people are damn fools and are an accident waiting to happen.

Cohesive crews don't become that way overnight. The same is true for people and horses - they need to work together for a while before they figure each other out.

[Citizen_Soldier]

Greetings,
I've worked in the past as a professional teamster and I think Bob is offering some pretty sound advice.

Most of my research on historic draft breeds is focused on Iowa, but what I've found in primary documents is that prior to the late 1860's there is no record of draft horses in the state. What folks were using during this time period were "horses of all work" and from all accounts these were just mixed blood animals that weighed around 900-1200 pounds.

When draft horses finally do make the scene, at first they are generally just stallions that are being bred to the local grade mares...resulting in more mixed bloodlines but these had a little more size to them.

Belgians don't make it to his part of the country until closer to the turn of the century.

I hope this helps,
Darrek Orwig

[Ringgold]

Howdy All!

I am posting this response for Ken Morris (10nycav) who is having some forum trouble and cannot post it himself. I must say that I find Ken's, as well as the other posts I have read here to be very much "spot-on" regarding horseflesh of the Rebellion era. This thread was truly desperately needed!

Here's Ken:

"The advice given on choosing horses is great. I will just add a little on breeding. In my previous discussions on horse breeds I focused on saddle horses for the most part. Artillery horses are more a type than a breed. Civil War era artillery manuals are pretty explicit on the type of horse desired: a height range of 15.1 to 16 hands, “Active, pony-built horses” with broad chests, ample bone and large feet. (Large, but not the flat platter shaped feet of the draft horse either.) They also desired a short, strong back, and round barrel with well sprung ribs. They most emphatically did not want long-legged, weedy, narrow chested types. On the other hand they did not want a draft horse either; an artillery horse needed to be able to pull quickly when needed, and big draft horses were simply too slow. Manuals specify horses in the 1100-1200 pound range, and I would expect that the high end for a wheel horse would be about 1300 pounds.

The term “pony built” occurs fairly often in Civil War era horse literature. It seems to refer to a full sized horse that had pony –type conformational traits: built rather low to the ground, with short strong cannon bones, short back, round barrel, substantial hindquarters, strong neck (inclined to be on the short side.) Such horses tend to be easy keepers and good weight carriers too; the 1st Maine regimental refers to troopers preferring this type of horse. The smaller animal of this type makes a good mounted infantry horse.

What horses in the US at the time of the Civil War had these traits? The closest match I could find is something called the “Vermont Draft” by Henry William Herbert, a noted horse expert and sporting writer of the era. He used this term merely to describe a type; it was NOT an established breed. It was simply a type of horse used on stagecoaches and express wagons not only in Vermont but also Maine, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts. The description of this horse fits that of the ideal artillery horse to a T. This type of horse was usually dark colored (bay or brown), often some dappling on the hindquarters, straight mane and tail, no feathering on the legs. I expect that good coaching horses were exported to other areas of the US (as indeed many other breeds were) so they were probably not unique to the Northeast, though certainly most common there. Herbert could only guess as to the origins of these horses since no breeding records were kept. He suspected the influence of the English dray-horse and the Cleveland Bay (which in those days, was a shorter, stouter animal than it is today.) Some stagecoach horses were said to be part Canadian.

Breeding for this type of horse—a fast working draft horse—is now a rarity in the US and most coaching horses are bred to be more showy. Usually for example, they are a good deal longer in the legs and have more knee action than the old time coacher. Europe used to have a lot of old fashioned coach horses as well, in fact the German Coach Horse of 100 years ago is also very close to the ideal artillery type. Not surprisingly, a lot of the base stock for the German Coach was bred for use by the German heavy cavalry. European coaching stock contributed greatly to the development of the modern Warmbloods, but again these are longer legged, more refined horses.

If a modern-day artillerist was to try to find horses that meet the old archetype, he would probably do well to look at crossbred horses with some draft blood, but not too much. Some Canadian horses do fit the artillery model quite well. Some old type Morgans as well, although these are harder and harder to find. They were becoming rare even 100 years ago and were called “old type” even then. Some people use Standardbreds, but because these horses are bred for pure speed on the track, they tend to be longer legged and more slab sided than the artillery ideal. Being bred for racing, their temperament sometimes tend to be rather hot, and many have a very bad canter. The true artillery horse needs to have three good gaits. It’s too bad that America no longer has a good stock of cob-type horses. These are very handy, good all rounders, and generally good tempered, but the American mania for taller, more refined horses has made them a thing of the past.

Ken Morris"

Thanks Ken! As usual, that was most-excellent!

Artie,
The only other thing that I would care to mention is that you might not want to refer to your M1841 Six-pounders as Napoleons. The gun that was given that moniker was the M1857 Light 12-pounder Field Gun Howitzer, also more commonly referred to in the service as simply the Light 12-pounder. I have read accounts by veterans after the War that occassionaly refer to 6-pounders as Napoleons, but that confusion appears to be more of a post-war happening.

[arthurlee]

This is why I joined the AC. I do have friends with cross breed horses that may fit the bill, two or three generations removed from draft animals. Also the information on my incorrect identification of our artillery pieces was an eye opener. Goes to show that just because one hears something over and over, does not make it fact.

Thanks for all the help. No where can one get so much information in one place.

One quick "rumor" about my group you may find amusing. When inducted for service the "Polk County Flying Artillery" was converted to infantry upon arrival in Richmond and later was made part of a sharpshooters battalion, but still kept that flowery name. Still looking for documents to back up the "name claim".

Artie Maxwell
Shepherd Texas

[Jeffrey Cohen]

We have Percherons. A person joined my unit that has them and uses them for carriage work. Should I have said no? I don't think so. What would you rather pull your gun on the field an F-150 or some Percherons.
It should be noted that the horses of the 1860's don't exist anymore, all the horses have gotten bigger, so if you really want to split hairs, nothing works.
I've taken some heat about my horses, but you don't look a gift horse in the mouth{Pardon the pun}.
Regards,
Jeffrey Cohen

[W. K. Osman]

Boys, I'm not particularly interested in joining the discussion, but know you might enjoy reading the original army specifications for artillery (and cavalry) horses. These are dated July 1863. I found them in Record Group 92, Entry 225, Consolidated Correspondence Files (Horses), at the National Archives many years ago and I do not believe they have ever been published. Finally a chance to share some of these goodies with folks who may find them of interest!
Stephen Osmanhttp://home.earthlink.net/~foragecaps/artilleryhorsespecifications.jpg

[Jeffrey Cohen]

Excellent!!!!
I doff my cap to you fine sir.
Regards,
Jeffrey Cohen

[marine05]

From Gibbon's Artillerist's Manual

SELECTION OF HORSES FOR ARTILLERY SERVICE
Qualities .- The horse for artillery service should be from five to seven years old (the latter
age to be preferred), and should be from fifteen to sixteen hands high.
The saddle horse should be free in his movements; have good sight; o, full, firm chest; be
sure-footed; have a good disposition, with boldness and courage; more bottom than spirit,
and not too showy.
The draft horse should stand erect on his legs, be strongly built, but free in his movements;
his shoulders should be large enough to give support to the collar, but not too heavy; his
body full, but not too long; the sides well rounded; the limbs solid, with rather strong
shanks, and feet in good condition.
To these qualities he should unite, as much as possible, the qualities of the saddle horse;
should trot and gallop easily; have even gaits, and not be skittish. The most suitable horse
for the pack-saddle is the one most nearly approaching the mule in his formation. He should
be very strong -backed, and from fourteen to fifteen hands high.
364 FIELD - ARTILLERY.
Horses with very. long legs, or long pasterns, should be rejected, as well as those which are
poor, lank, stubborn, or vicious.

The uprightness with which a horse habitually stands, has a great bearing upon his good
qualities and endurance. Viewed in profile, his front legs should be comprised between two
verticals, the one, A, Fig. 965, let fall from the point of his shoulder, and terminating at his
toe; the other, B, from the top of the withers, and passing through the elbow. A line, C,
passing
370 FIELD - ARTILLERY.
through the fetlock joint, should divide the limb into two espial parts. The hind legs should
be comprised between two verticals, A', falling from the hip, and B', falling from the point
of the buttock; the foot at very nearly equal distances from these two lines. A line, C’, let
fall from the hip -joint, should be equally distant from these two lines, A', B'.
Viewed in front, a
vertical let fall from the
point of the shoulder,
should divide the leg
along its central line.
In rear, a vertical from
the point of the
buttock, should divide
the leg equally
through out its entire
length.
The height of the
horse, measured from
the top of the withers
to the ground, should
be equal to his length from the point of the shoulder to the point of the buttock. His chest,
looking at him from the front, should be broad; and viewed from the rear, he should be
broad, with good muscle, and strongly built.

S/F

DJM

[1stMaine]

Comrades,

So, anyone else pick up on the note that buglers were to be mounted upon greys?

Makes them easier to spot in a crowd.

Respects,

[Bob 125th NYSVI]

Most of my research on historic draft breeds is focused on Iowa, but what I've found in primary documents is that prior to the late 1860's there is no record of draft horses in the state. What folks were using during this time period were "horses of all work" and from all accounts these were just mixed blood animals that weighed around 900-1200 pounds.

European type draft horses were brought to this country as early as the Revolutionary War. And the "Pennsylvania Dutch" (read Amish) certainly had a breeding program going by the Civil War that eventually produced both the American version of the "Belgian" and the American Cream in 1905.

And the CSA did acquire some of that type during their foray's north.

The discussion about 'pony build' is also very usable for a teamster. Basically horses today are not built (even drafts) to move heavy loads like their 'work-for-a-living" ancestors were. Mostly they are tall leggy carriage horses.

The closer a horse is to the ground the more draft it can get on the load.

A broad built horse with good sound thick legs will be able to easily move a heavy load. Remember a harness is a relatively small burden on a horse and a horse doesn't actually 'pull' it's load, it pushes it. The harness translates the horse's push into the 'pull' that moves the load.

Think of it as a nose tackle, tall rangy guys don't play the position, short square power guys do. The same with a 'draft' horse.

And while neither side used 'draft' horses as artillery horse regularly during the war, they went for regular horses with a draft type build (the ones cavalrymen would consider ugly).

Two options you may want to consider is a Halflinger "draft pony" which will get you into a better size range or lately I have been seeing some very interesting draft/pony crosses that would fit the bill nicely in both size and looks.

If you want to go with your quarterhorses have them professionally trained. Driving is completely different that riding and the horse has to learn/unlearn a lot of different things (like neck reigning verses line driving). The other thing is get a 4th horse. A full sized cannon, loaded cassion and gun crew is a fair amount of weight for two quarterhorses to move.

And to the person who uses the Perchies. I got to agree, even the wrong horse is better than a pickup.

[MDec]

At various Reenactments and parades, we've been fortunate enough to be horse drawn. Unfortunately, it's been with belgians or percherons. Last year I was approached by a gentlemen owning 4 percherons wanting to team up with us for various activities. After a lot of consideration I turned him down, hoping to find someone with more correct horses nearby that would be willing to get involved. That hasn't happened yet. The guys in my group keep reminding me of the offer I turned down. The frowns don't get any better when I keep telling them that I would prefer to be more authentic. It looks like my 1988 Chevrolet pickup with 330,000 miles will have to do the job this upcoming season.

Michael Dec
Rutledge's/McClung's Tennessee Battery

[Citizen_Soldier]

Bob,
The material I was sharing was more focused on Iowa and that part of the midwest. My findings are from primary sources that include original Annual Iowa Agriculture Society Reports from the 1860's and 1870's along with original period agricultural publications from Iowa State University's collection. Secondary sources such as Prairie to Cornbelt and 1846-1946 A century of Iowa Agriculture to name a few are also supportive of the material I posted. This research was used in the development of an open air museum program focusing on 1870's agriculture and transportation in Iowa and received peer review.

I wouldn't doubt that there were some draft breed development going on out east, just wanted to share what was taking place in the midwest during the time of the rebellion and soon after in regards to this subject. Certainly a great thread!

Wish you the best,
Darrek Orwig

[Bob 125th NYSVI]

Bob,
The material I was sharing was more focused on Iowa and that part of the midwest. My findings are from primary sources that include original Annual Iowa Agriculture Society Reports from the 1860's and 1870's along with original period agricultural publications from Iowa State University's collection. Secondary sources such as Prairie to Cornbelt and 1846-1946 A century of Iowa Agriculture to name a few are also supportive of the material I posted. This research was used in the development of an open air museum program focusing on 1870's agriculture and transportation in Iowa and received peer review.

I wouldn't doubt that there were some draft breed development going on out east, just wanted to share what was taking place in the midwest during the time of the rebellion and soon after in regards to this subject. Certainly a great thread!

Wish you the best,
Darrek Orwig

And they (Iowa State) do a great job. Always wanted to get to Iowa to get to the State Draft Horse Auction.

I think the differences in the two regions is based on east of the Appalachins agriculture was very established and running in a well worn groove, with the oldest son taking over a thriving farm. It's easy to "waste" money in developing new breeds when the base is real solid.

Iowa was still sort of the 'frontier' in the 1860s with the ground being broken by the other sons who didn't get the family farm. They didn't have time to 'experiment' with using drafts or the money to 'waste' importing them. They had to make do with local more versitle horses (I love riding my drafts but you ain't herding cattle with them).

That being said, the CW definitely kicked midwest ag into high gear (where it remains today) and by the turn of the century places like Ohio, Iowa and Indiana were second to none in the breeding of fine draft horses.

Its funny the "draft" horse war was really WWI where they were used to haul the heavy guns into action. Something that required muscle not speed. And while they lasted into WWII in the same role, the mechanization of WWI really was the begining of the end of their lives as the 'main' power source in American agriculture.

I love my drafts and will stack them up against anybody for work ethic and reliability but gun horses they ain't

Unless someone has a 100 pound siege gun they wanted moved into position. Then I'm open to discussions, because you can hook all the sissy little horse artillery gun horses you want to that baby and she still ain't getting into position in time to fire.

[Jack Enright]

Fascinating thread, this one, especially as I'm interested in both horses and artillery.

I was most interested to read the official requirements for horses, which came out taller than I would have expected, but I couldn't help but think that most of the period photos I've seen of army horses seem to be more the size of what I'd call a cob - i.e., around 14.2 to 15.2 hands, rather than 15 to 16 hands or above.

Could this be due to the sheer numbers of horses that an army required, and that the demand just outstripped the supply? After all, if you work through the numbers, you'll find you're looking at hundreds of thousands of animals per army - and the losses in a sizeable battle were very heavy indeed - particularly to artillery horses, which were horribly exposed to accurate infantry fire. And while it is possible to set up a production facility quite quickly for rifles or locomotives, one mare can only breed one foal per year, and you have to wait several years before it's fit for work. So maybe the army buyers were forced to settle for what they could get, rather than what the regulations specified?

The other thing with reference to heavy draft horses; in Britain, horses like the Shire and the Clydesdale weren't bred into their massive size until quite recently. The Shire stud book was not set up until the 1880's, and reference to old British photos show that a typical British draft horse (as distinct from a show horse) was between 15 and 16 hands, weighing around 1500 to 1600 lbs. And this was true through late Victorian times well into the 1920's.

Equally, the Cleveland Bay was shorter on the leg, and more sturdy than many are today, as, like the old Clydesdale, the roads in the areas they worked over were often only fit for packhorse traffic. The transformation of the Cleveland into a carriage horse was a late Victorian thing, down to the increasing affluence of the middle classes.

Likewise, the increase in size and weight of breeds like the Shire and the Clydesdale was principally due to the railways having rapidly increasing tonnages of freight to deliver from railheads, and, thanks to Mr McAdam, better roads to work over; again, late rather than early Victorian.

If you could find any in the US, your best bet might be a Welsh Cob, or a Dales Pony (from the North-East of England). Both of these still exist pretty much as they have done for at least 175 years, and in the case of the Welsh Cob, much further back than that. Another possibility would be the lighter type of Highland Pony, from Scotland. All of these come out around 14.2 to 15 hands or so, and fit the Army specification (in terms of shape and proportions of the neck, legs, barrel, and so on) very closely.

These were well-favoured by the British Army for campaign work, as they were strong enough to haul a fair load, and at a fair speed, but could keep going even on short rations, and grazing only - unlike the bigger animals. In fact, a British War Office book, the Army Manual of Animal Management (1933), specifically cautions purchasing officers not to buy horses of 16 hands and above for fieldwork, as they cannot cope with the hardship. From memory, it said the optimum size was around 15 hands.

I recently had the good fortune to take part in the Shiloh re-enactment, and was very impressed by how period-correct the horses looked there, both cavalry and artillery. I don't know which units they belonged to, but if you're looking for a source of the right type of horse, I'd say it was well worth getting in touch with those units, and asking them. I'd think the event organizers should be able to put you in touch.

As far as I know, the event website is still up and running at:-

www.battleofshilohreenactment.com

If anyone wants a look at photos, breed descriptions etc, of the Welsh Cob, Dales Pony or Highland, e-mail me at the address below, and I'll send you some useful web addresses.

Best regards,

Jack Enright

Co. E, 18th MO Vol. Inf.

redleg_jack@yahoo.co.uk

[Bob 125th NYSVI]

The size/weight debate is something that bedevil's draft breeders and shows today. A top horse judge form 1900 would not recoginize the horses in the ring today for the breed he was familiar with. And a farmer couldn't use them effectively either.

It is certain that today's draft animals are massively larger than their predecessors and wound up that way once they stopped being the prime motive power of the world. Funny they got bigger as they got less useful.

Unfortunately many breeds today have been 'ruined' (ok maybe changed) by the fact that they no longer work for living.

The Quarterhorse is another example. In the 1970s-90s the judge in the show ring want to see a relaxed horse. And how could they judge that? They wanted the horse to have his nose so close to the ground he could "roll a peanut" with it.

OH for crying out loud, they were bred to be general purpose horses including being cow ponys. You can't see a cow when your head is down in the bushes. But the judges didn't care. And ruined the usefulness of the breed.

Same happened with drafts when they had to be both powerful and manuverable they were shorter, stockier and lighter.

Today even among Belgians the judges want to see a tall leggy horse. Not what they were bred to do.

As to what the army wanted and what they took, well by the end of the war it was probably two different things.

The animals were used up at such a rate that I'm sure they took almost anything with 4 legs that surived being shipped to the depot. Only a few animals born in 1860 would have been fit for Army service by 1865 due to age and maturity. You couldn't bred replacements fast enough, so they must have taken whatever they could have.

[arthurlee]

I have two quarter horse that would be thrown out of a "Horse Show" but have worked cows all their lives, and no, they do not keep their nose on the ground like the judges would like to see, but They do however look as if they are ready to push into the meanest animal head first. I think perhaps this would have been a requirement during the war.

At 14.5 to 15 hands with a stocky build I bet these animals would pass a typical inspection for period animals. I was also at Shiloh and found that most animals were of the same build as mine. Darker horses of the period were considered better animals, if you listen to a few of the Old Timers here in East Texas, but I think this was a matter of taste.

I would not assume to just hook my animals up to a gun, but use the advice given in this forum. I think that I may acquire 4 animals from a local rancher, could work and put on a good show with proper training. My conclusion then - Quarter Horses not suitable for a horse show, of a cow horse build with a good and steady nature should work fine.

Arthur Lee Maxwell
Shepherd Texas