Cavalry/Mounted Troops In Mexican Revolution

[MikeBlakeUK]

Can anyone help, please? I am trying to do some models of revolutionary cavalry and have realised I do not have a proper handle on this. I have been studying photos, and my conclusions are that

Federale cavalry:
a) invariably carried the carbine slung diagonally across the back, over the left shoulder.
b) always carried a sabre too, usually from the waistbelt even when mounted but sometimes on the horse, on either side.
c) do not appear to ever have been armed with a pistol (other than officers and Rurales).
d) ammunition was carried in boxes rather than bandoleers.

Mounted Revolutionaries:
a) never carried the carbine/rifle slung across the back, but always in a boot under the leg; sometimes butt forward, sometimes butt backwards; usually on the right side but sometimes under the left, butt forward.
b) occasionally officers carried a sabre, usually under the left leg.
c) were usually armed with a pistol, sometimes two.
d) mostly carried ammo in bandoleers, around the waist and across the body in both directions; one, two and three (most frequent), four and even five at a time

Can anybody add information, suggest corrections, point to photos of other methods, provide evidence which confirms or contradicts please?

Thanks

Mike B

[rayarthart]

Along with the 100th Anniversary of World War I there is the earlier anniversary of the Mexican Punitive Expedition of 1916-1917.

[Pat Holscher]

If you search this site you'll find a lot of references to the Mexican Revolution. I'd start there. Some of those have photographs, and others have links to photos. Some of the links will take you to University of Texas' photo collection, as they have some good ones.

Generally, I think your synopsis is correct, but a person does need to keep in mind that the "sides" in the Mexican Revolution were somewhat fluid, so who is on what side at any one time can be a bit confusing. Added to that, we have to consider that true Mexican "Federal" forces really only existed as such up until Carranza took over the government, which extinguished the formal influence of forces that pre dated Modero, but that none the less a Mexican central government existed throughout the struggle. So, when we look at the Punitive Expedition and the Mexican Revolution in that time frame, the government that is thought of as being the legitimate central government was one that was lead by a former revolutionary (or maybe a current revolutionary), Carranza, at war with other revolutionaries. During that time frame the army of the central government remained uniformed and equipped in a more or less (with the emphasis on more or less) official appearance, but its allies weren't always so equipped or attired.

[MikeBlakeUK]

Pat
I wish I'd said that-succinctly put and spot on. The 'later' Federal forces, dressed mostly courtesy surplus US uniforms, are difficult to ID by eye from their opponents unless the caption says so.

Thanks for the suggestions. I have looked through this site, and many others, and the Casaloa volumes too, often with magnifying glass trying to see the detail in badly reproduced photos. Should you, or other members, know any specific sites with photos of mounted troops I'd be grateful for the link, please.

[Couvi]

Mike,

You may want to try surfing through the Robert Runyon Photographs: http://runyon.lib.utexas.edu/

[Kurt Hughes]

Hi Mike, below is a photo I have of Mexican Revolutionary cavalry, I possibly have others but will have to do some searching.
Kurt.

IMG_20150531_0001.jpg (368.66 KiB) Viewed 10775 times

[Pat Holscher]

Hi Mike, below is a photo I have of Mexican Revolutionary cavalry, I possibly have others but will have to do some searching.
Kurt.

IMG_20150531_0001.jpg

Nice photo!

[MikeBlakeUK]

Nice - it's B marvellous! One I have never seen before, and I have seen a few. If you have others I would love to see them.

The sad thing is that I will now go through the photo analysing each man (and horse) noting the details of clothing, equipment and weapons, then summarise the information and categories with numbers eg so many with this , so many with that.

I have developed some clothing-type categories, Vaquero, Campesino, Indian, Urban and Military, to convey an overall appearance and reduce repetition. Obviously elements from each were also worn together, but certain of the ‘styles’ tended to be more prevalent in different factions, creating a similarity in appearance which I also compare the results to.

[Pat Holscher]

Nice - it's B marvellous! One I have never seen before, and I have seen a few. If you have others I would love to see them.

The sad thing is that I will now go through the photo analysing each man (and horse) noting the details of clothing, equipment and weapons, then summarise the information and categories with numbers eg so many with this , so many with that.

I have developed some clothing-type categories, Vaquero, Campesino, Indian, Urban and Military, to convey an overall appearance and reduce repetition. Obviously elements from each were also worn together, but certain of the ‘styles’ tended to be more prevalent in different factions, creating a similarity in appearance which I also compare the results to.

Types should be useful, but be careful none the less. Some northern Mexican forces that we'd tend to associate with being rural have quite a few members dressed in clothing that's fairly contemporary for the time. Cowboy hats of the period rather than sombreros, riding boots of the period, etc. Even Villa can sometimes be seen in uniform.

Southern Mexican forces under Zapata are more predictable, due to their heavily agricultural origin.

[MikeBlakeUK]

Pat,

You are quite right, of course. I should perhaps have explained that the 'categories' are not used singly to define the force, rather they are applied in a hierarchy, with the predominant first. But often as you say, they will be heavily mixed eg 50/50 Urban/Campesino.

It came about as a way to help wargamers get the overall look of a specific force right (or better, anyway) instead of the way they tend to simply do all revolutionaries either like Calvera's bandits or the peons they terrorised. It is in no way scientific, but I was pleased to find some support for it in the way that Ian Jacobs' suggestion in Ranchero Revolt: The Mexican Revolution in Guerrero. Austin, U Texas Press, 1982, for an interesting new way to look at the Revolutionaries, that they were not quite the ‘oppressed masses’ of popular conception:

‘Regional history has naturally tended to emphasize…fragmentation of the revolutionary movement, and in the process has done much to destroy the traditional image of the revolution as a mass uprising of the oppressed peasantry. …in some states—Chihuahua, for example—the dispossessed peasant played a minor role, while in others, such as Sonora, the participation of rural labourers was tightly controlled by a leadership concerned to maintain as far as possible the status quo. Even in central Mexico, where the peasantry constituted the great mass of the population, Oaxaca could remain relatively calm while Morelos was in constant revolutionary turmoil.’

He goes on to give a broad analysis of some states, which has been used to help suggest what the insurgents from those states might have looked like in terms of Vaquero, Campesino, Indian, Urban and Military.

But I am drifting away from the topic, blown off course by my enthusiasm for the MR in general-I apologise.

[Kurt Hughes]

Hi Mike

Have sent you an email. I have some more pics I can send you that might be of interest, I cannot post them here as I am not sure where I copied as most go back years.
Kurt.

[MikeBlakeUK]

Thanks Kurt. I have responded direct.