reduced artillery movement

[Elmar Bijlsma]

For the large convoys used by Marlborough and Frederick the Great I have only seen horse-carts and horses mentioned. Same thing with the heavy siege trains. I know of one British battery forced to use oxen in the Peninsular War at one point but thats it. What makes you think oxen were used?


CBR

Well, I'd certainly disagree with Kingfisher foot artillery were issued oxen with any frequency worth modelling in TW. It was not doctrine in any European army I know off to do so. Maybe in an "Oh dear, half our horses have died and hussars took the rest" emergency.
There is this common misconception that foot artillery is what you get when the artillery runs out of horses. Not true at all. The guns as well as the guncrew were transported on horses (the crew sitting on their caissons) The main difference was in their roles.
Horse artillery was intended to be used in a vastly more flexible way on the battlefield. This mean large horse teams, larger gun crew and/or smaller guns then foot artillery. This to keep up with the tactical movement of cavalry and quicker deployment of the guns.

But to my knowledge oxen were not uncommon for heavy siege artillery. If you want something truly heavy to be moved, it's hard to beat oxen. It would certainly explain why in my reading the siege train was never where it was needed. Normal artillery? I'd like to see a gun crew try to rapidly re-deploy with oxen during a battle. That'd be a sight to see. :)
Wouldn't like to hazard a guess on oxen in the bagage train or supply columns. TBH I spend more tiime studdying the parts of armies that went *bang*! ;)
Were horses really that widely used in transport? I guess those big brutish farmhorses sure could pull their weight (sorry) but how finicky are they about food? AFAIK you can feed mules and oxen pretty much anything. I'm pretty sure Oman wrote a few lines of how happy Wellington was with the durability of his mule train, unlike horses that needed a never-ending replenishment to keep the numbers up.

[CBR]

But to my knowledge oxen were not uncommon for heavy siege artillery. If you want something truly heavy to be moved, it's hard to beat oxen.

They might have been used on some occasions. But David Chandler has tables for equipment and number of animals used for artillery/siege trains (late 17th to mid 18th century) and only horses are mentioned. Late 17th century French supply services were handled by horse carts as mentioned by John A Lynn. Christopher Duffy's books on the Prussian and Austrian armies of the SYW only mentions horses for both artillery and logistics, even providing tables with number of wagons and horses hired for each year in the war. Mules could be used as pack animals in mountainous areas.

Oxen were used in the AWI but when I can find actual numbers it still seems horses were used more.

I know next to nothing about what happened in India but just going through some of the battles there seems to have been numerous cavalry involved. But from what I can find yes oxen were used in transport roles.

Now I admit I don't know that much about the advantages and disadvantages with the different animals but it is my understanding that oxen are rather slow and cannot work that long (and overheating easily because of lack of sweat glands)

It does seem oxen are better at living on grass only compared to mules and horses that need grain to sustain their weight. Mules are a bit slower than horses but more durable so less losses during a campaign.


CBR