HOME -->  ARTICLES -->  Feature Stories and Articles     Back  
The Mystery Saddle - The 1834 Manual of Tactics
by: Todd Holmes

One of the key pieces of evidence that has been used to enlighten, or obscure depending on your point of view, the study of what the 1833 dragoon equipment looked like is a manual published in the City of Washington  in 1834, by Francis Preston Blair.   A revised reprint of a 1826 edition, this manual describes the use of flat saddles by cavalry. 

Included on this page are some key pieces from this manual ( via a photocopy obtain from Rollie Schafer - many thanks!).

In the end though, I will still suggest that this manual does not illustrate the actual saddle issued to the 1st Regiment of Dragoons, and neither of these images show the "1833 dragoon saddle".
Read more comments on the nature of this source here.

1834man_text.gif (13027 bytes)

This is a scan of the section that begins describing the saddle, and include important footnotes discussing the two illustrated saddles in the plate images below. 

1834_plate2.gif (75524 bytes)

Here is the full plate showing the recommended French hussar saddle, and the saddle "commonly in use in the United States".  It's rather massive at 74k, so you might want to just get the flat saddle image below.
 
The key phrase is "commonly in use" - which begs the question - how could you consider the brand spanking new dragoon equipment heading west out of Jefferson Barracks, Missouri, as "commonly in use in the United States"?

1834manual.gif (6623 bytes)

The flat saddle image from the full plate - note the ties or straps at the pommel.   The main point of similarity with the Ft. Riley mystery saddle is the lobed skirt (that part that covers stirrup bar - the big one below is correctly called a "flap").  
1834_plate6.gif (5920 bytes)

This manual shows a detailed drawing of a "mail pillion", which was used to carry the valise.  Note that the contract letters describing the dragoon equipment to be made by T. Grimsley state that he will be providing a common style "coat pad" for the same function - apparently two terms for the same article.

"* The saddle, bridle, and other equipment, commonly in use in the United States, are here described."

The writer is speaking of equipment that is common in the United States - which clearly communicates that the equipment is widely used, while not saying that this is government issue or government design. If this was the equipment issued by the government, you might have expected the writer to say exactly that.

To bolster this viewpoint, look to the next line: "The Hussar Saddle is, however, preferable, and is accordingly recommended;"

Why would a writer of an "official drill and tactics manual" suggest one type of equipment be preferable over another? These types of prejudicial comments would be reserved for recommendations to the War Dept., or the Secty of War, or Ordnance/QM chief, so that the issue article could be changed. To recommend one over the other that is "commonly in use" suggests that equipment choice is available - which isn't normally the case with the regular army.

If this manual was, as I would contend, a manual of drill and tactics meant for distribution/sale to the wide variety of state militia organizations as well as the new Dragoon regiment, then these two comments make complete sense. The writer recognizes the usual state of equipage of militia units ("commonly in use in the United States"), but makes a positive recommendation for another military equipment style. But, what about the regular Dragoons?

Why would the book be titled "A System of Tactics...for the Cavalry and Light Infantry and Riflemen of the United States; By Authority of the Department of War" if it were not an official manual of the United State Army?

"for the Cavalry and Light Infantry and Riflemen of the United States;" - note, that this does not say the 'United State Army' or 'Army of the United States' (a distinct and small organization compared to the vast numbers of militia). It speaks to the WHOLE of cavalry, light infantry, and riflemen of the (entire) United States - ie., it includes all militia as well - all the armed forces of the U.S.

"by Authority of the Department of War" - Sounds like this makes it official - considering the fact that the Constitution calls for a "well-organized militia". While this phrase of "well-organized militia" is almost an oxymoron, the Department of War would be the part of the government that would oversee the basic organization of the militia. Part of that oversight would be to promote the standardization of manuals of tactics, hence their interest in publishing manuals such as this one.

Well, then, why didn't the Dept. of War put the Grimsley-made spanish saddle and associated equipment in this official manual?

Consider the "market" for tactics manuals in the new dragoon regiment - less than a few hundred manuals at the absolute limit. Plus, the regiment was only formed in the very latter part of 1833, and descriptions of it's contracted equipment or drawings of the same would likely have not been available to the publishers. Ah, questions, questions, questions.

A very recent discovery of documents show a request for funds to print this manual being made to Congress in April 1834. Details state that the quantity to be produced was 5,000, with 250 allotted to the new regiment of dragoons, and the remainder (4,750) to be distributed to the militia. Ie., the primary market of this manual WAS the militia, which reinforces the emphasis noted above.

In short, to say that the illustrations shown in this manual represent the equipment purchased and used by the 1st Regiment of Dragoons (and this saddle, by extension, being the "1833 dragoon" saddle) could easily be erroneous. Considering the contract information that contradicts this manual's illustrations, it could be reasonable to assume that there is an lack of 'historical veracity' in the manual's depiction.

Until other documentation comes to light, these questions revolving around this manual and the unusual plate remain. It is completely understandable that this manual was presumed to show "the" actual dragoon saddle, and would still be reasonable, except for the discovery of the actual contract letters containing detailed and contradictory descriptions.

So, it all comes down to whether you want to believe a manual printed far distant from the actual area of operations, or whether you wish to believe the signed and witnessed government contract - signed by an extremely well-connected and successful businessman who continued to provide the government with saddlery and horse equipment for another 25+ years. Contracts that were signed and witnessed around TWO months before deliveries must have taken place in order to have the Dragoons drilled ("for weeks and weeks") and ready for their first expedition that left Jefferson Barracks on November 20, 1833. That is a huge stretch of the imagination.

Below is a short outline of Francis P. Blair - itself quite interesting, but the connections to Grimsley are perhaps more telling. Francis P. Blair was from a prominent business family in St. Louis Missouri, who had considerable contacts with another prominent businessman there, Thornton Grimsley. St. Louis had a early and well-developed businessman's association, which both of these gentlemen were active members. Like all things political and military in the early 19th century, personal connections reigned supreme.

More Details About Francis P. Blair

back to top

Blair, Francis Preston,
1791-1876, American journalist and politician, b. Abingdon, Va. Through the Frankfort, Ky., journal Argus of Western America, which he edited with Amos Kendall, Blair was an ardent supporter of Andrew Jackson. At William T. Barry's suggestion, he traveled to Washington and established the Washington (D.C.) Globe in Dec., 1830, which exerted great political influence as the Jacksonian "court journal until 1841. Along with Kendall, Blair also was one of the leading members of the Kitchen Cabinet. In Washington he also founded the Congressional Globe (now the Congressional Record ), in which the daily proceedings of Congress were recorded. When James K. Polk became President, Blair, a Van Buren Democrat, was forced to sell his interest in the Washington Globe to Thomas Ritchie. Later, because of his antislavery views, Blair was one of the founders of the Republican party, and he presided over its first national convention in 1856. In 1865 he engineered the futile Hampton Roads Peace Conference. An influential adviser to President Lincoln during the early years of the Civil War, he eventually returned to the Democratic party because he was opposed to radical Republicanism.

The Kitchen Cabinet
in U.S. history, popular name for the group of intimate, unofficial advisers of President Jackson. Early in his administration Jackson abandoned official cabinet meetings and used heads of departments solely to execute their departmental duties, while the policies of his administration were formed in meetings of the Kitchen Cabinet. The members of the informal cabinet included the elder Francis P. Blair, Duff Green, Isaac Hill, Amos Kendall, and William B. Lewis. John H. Eaton of the regular cabinet met with the group; Martin Van Buren also was taken into its confidence. Several members of the Kitchen Cabinet were able journalists and editors of influential regional newspapers. They continued to wield effective pens in defense of the administration measures after they came to Washington. Kendall—perhaps the ablest and most influential member—vigorously defended the policies of Andrew Jackson in the Globe, the administration journal edited by Francis P. Blair. Following the cabinet reorganization of 1831, the Kitchen Cabinet became less important.

See W. E. Smith, The Francis Preston Blair Family in Politics (1933); A. M. Schlesinger, Jr., The Age of Jackson (1945); B. J. Hendrick, Lincoln's War Cabinet (1946).

Information from encyclopedia.com