When did the Punitive Expedition officially end?

[rayg]

About what date was the expedition considered officially over and the troops withdrawn? Ray

RayG/Wisconsin

[Pat Holscher]

Originally posted by rayg
About what date was the expedition considered officially over and the troops withdrawn? Ray

RayG/Wisconsin

The official end of the Punitive Expedition is February 5, 1917. I'm not sure when the last soldier detailed as part of the Expedition crossed back into the US. It may have been a couple of days before that. Withdrawing the troops from Mexico actually took slightly longer than the Army had hoped.

As a side note, Gen. Funston died on Feb 19, 1917.

The Punitive Expedition as a campaign can be a bit deceptive, however, as it the official dates for it create the illusion that it had a neat start and end. As an official event, that's true, but in terms of military activity, it isn't.

The border was seeing a lot of activity prior to the Punitive Expedition starting. There was a very high degree of tension about various Mexican forces crossing and recrossing the border. This was made worse by the fact that the US tolerated it at first. Modero, Carranza, and Villa, had all crossed over the border at one time after having some refuge in the US. While from the US perspective this didn't amount to anything, to the various Mexican factions the fact that Mexican revolutionary leaders of one kind or another could do that no doubt encouraged a belief that the border didn't mean much.

To make matters worse, Wilson opened and closed the border with virtually no consistency. After Huerta murdered Modero, he closed the border to arms shipments, and then nearly started a war when he started what amounted to a Naval blockade of Mexico, and actually ended up sending sailors and Marines into Vera Cruz. That predated the Punitive Expedition, but it resulted in combat with Mexican federal troops loyal to Heurta. Heurta took it remarkably well, taking into account that it was a belligerent act and had the effect of aiding Carranza.

After that, even though Carranza never had any love for the US, he allowed Carranzaista troops transport in Texas, and allowed arms to be shipped in Texas to Carranza as well. That seems to be flatly contradictory to his earlier goal not to allow arms into the Mexican revolution, and had the effect of aiding Carranza against Villa and Zapata. The border was proving really fluid at that time, and all sorts of Mexican factions of indeterminable loyalties were crossing the border. For his part, Wilson nearly convinced himself that war with Mexico was inevitable on a couple of occasions.

After US troops recrossed into the US, violence on the border continued, and the Army occasionally fought in reaction to it. For example, I've read at least one account of artillery engaging Mexican forces on the border in 1919. This occured due to the spill over of fighting on the border into the US.

I'm actually not sure when the last occasion of US troops crossing into Mexico was. Nor am I certain when the first was. Wilson thought he had a deal with Carranza to allow pursuit of bandits across the border, which would have appeared to allow Carranza to do the same. The first instance I'm aware of is when cavalry pursued Villistas from Columbus, and I think that is the first instance. I'd be curious if there were pursuits after February 5, 1917.

I've often thought that the cavalrymen who served on the border with Mexico during and after WWI really get the short end of the stick, in terms of their service being recalled. WWI was really bad, no doubt, but getting shot at on the Mexican border is no picnic. The service the cavalrymen performed, it seems to me, was valuable WWI service. And the Germans knew that, as they tried to get a Mexican ally to fight the US. The Mexican goverment's appreciation of the presence of the Army helped deter that.

Pat

[rayg]

Thanks Pat, great info. One of the reasons I asked is that I have a M1912 rimmed eagle button cartridge belt datd Jan. 1917 and I was just curious if that date fell within the punitive period. I know the chances of the belt, at that late date, being used there is very remote but at least it falls within the dates of it, Ray






RayG/Wisconsin

[Joseph Sullivan]

Remote likelihood of use in the PE, but a very good chance of use in the ongoing border action that lasted well into the 1920s.

Joe

[Pat Holscher]

It certainly is in very nice shape.

Pat

[Pat Holscher]

When did manufacture of this pattern belt cease?

Pat

[rayg]

For some reason, even though they already found that this M1912 belt system didn't work out well, they kept manufacturing them well into 1918. The first ones had rimless eagle buttons and were OD in color. Then they were made in khaki with rimmed buttons like the one I have. They changed to "lift the dot" closures about the 2nd or third month into 1917.

Here's a 1910 mounted belt that was only made for three years until 1913 as it was made for the Colt 1909, 45 cal. revolver which was adopted in 1909 because of the lack of stopping power the current issue 38 long revolver had. Loose rounds were carried in the smaller pockets. When the 1911 automatic was adopted many of these belts had the small pockets cut off and a 45 magazine pouch put on the belt. Some of these belts, unmodified and modified, may have seen service in the PE in some guard units.



RayG/Wisconsin

[rayg]

Looking back over the photos of the thread of the PE, I came accross this photo with a trooper wearing the above M1910 belt. The small pockets are visible on the belt. Can't make out the handgun. what ever it is he's wearing it on a waist belt having loops for loose cartridges. Can anyone enlarge the photo to tell? Ray


Schlick


RayG/Wisconsin

[Kurt Hughes]

Hi Ray

Thanks for sharing the pictures of some nice items.

With regards to the period photograph, the trooper could also be wearing the M1909 belt, of course it is impossible for us to be certain, but in many of the period photographs I have seen, the cavalry troops are wearing m1909 belts, although I must add, in some photographs posted here last year, it did appear that some Cavalry troops may have been wearing M1910 belts.

In the picture above it looks to me that he is carrying an M1911 pistol, it also looks like he has a mag pouch on the left side of his web belt, in place of the two pistol pouches, as you mentioned above. Although it is difficult to be certain.

The M1912 belt was also made in O/D with rimmed eagle snaps, until I think late 1916 when the colour was changed to khaki.

Kurt.

[rayg]

Hi Kurt, you know I looked at that belt and tried to determine if it was a 1909 Cav. belt or a 1910. I choose the 1910 belt based on the space between the small pouches and the buckle end of the belt. (the amount of belt showing). If you notice it appears the same as the 1910 belt. That's not to say that the trooper could of had a waist where the fold of the 1909 belt would be in the same position. Also I couldn't quite make out if that was a 45 mag pouch on the other side or not. Glad you could tell. Ray

RayG/Wisconsin

[Pat Holscher]

Neat stuff!

Pat

[Pat Holscher]

Originally posted by rayg
About what date was the expedition considered officially over and the troops withdrawn? Ray

RayG/Wisconsin

After US troops recrossed into the US, violence on the border continued, and the Army occasionally fought in reaction to it. For example, I've read at least one account of artillery engaging Mexican forces on the border in 1919. This occurred due to the spill over of fighting on the border into the US.

Another example of cross border action continuing on in to 1919:

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-fr ... 946896D6CF

Air and cavalry action south of the Rio Grande.

[Pat Holscher]

Originally posted by rayg
About what date was the expedition considered officially over and the troops withdrawn? Ray

RayG/Wisconsin

After US troops recrossed into the US, violence on the border continued, and the Army occasionally fought in reaction to it. For example, I've read at least one account of artillery engaging Mexican forces on the border in 1919. This occurred due to the spill over of fighting on the border into the US.

Another example of cross border action continuing on in to 1919:

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-fr ... 946896D6CF

Air and cavalry action south of the Rio Grande.

More on this expedition:

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-fr ... 946896D6CF

[Pat Holscher]

I know that this poster was put up on another thread, but off hand, I'm not sure which one.

Anyhow, this demonstrates the ongoing concern with the border with Mexico during this period.

[Pat Holscher]

Bump.

[Pat Holscher]

Bumped up in light of the centenary of the commencement of the Punitive Expedition on March 9.