Talk:Battle of Bandera Pass

message: Way excessive "References" section. First, it's always problematic to have books listed as general references; this was acceptable up to 2005 or so but really isn't sufficient for WP:V today. Second, the knowledge of the battle seems to all fall back on a couple of personal accounts.  The key facts should be cited somehow (Harvard style is fine), and the section converted to a Further reading section. Fourth, there are just more references than the background material (itself of appropriate length, I would say) really requires. We're not hte library, and we shouldn't be "read more about it". If a book like Cynthia Ann Parker: The Life and the Legend has no clear relationship to the material, it probably should not be included. The general histories of the Comanche belong in articles on the Indians. I would say rename the section and cut back to the most relevant three-to-five references (relevant to the battle, that is, not a related general topic). --Dhartung | Talk 01:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Dhartung | Talk  Excellent points about the references.  I will redo the section next week, and remove sources such as Cynthia Ann Parker: The Life and the Legend.  You are correct that the only link to the article from that book is relating the decline of Comanche power in Texas to Bandera Pass and the introduction of revolvers.  I won't have time till midweek, but I will edit and rewrite that section completely.  Thanks for the critique, I want this to be a good article, as the event is, in historical retrospect, quite important as a military benchmark. JohninMaryland (talk) 02:47, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  References? 

message: This battle did not happen even remotely the way it is presented here.  I am a big fan of John Coffee Hays and it isn't enjoyable to do this but, as a historian, I owe allegiance to the truth.
John Coffee Hays did not take possession of the Colt repeating pistols until 1844.  There are signed receipts when he took possession of the guns which were originally purchased for the Texas Navy.  The Republic of Texas, always short of funds, decided that annexation to the United States was a better route to security than trying to field a creditable naval presence.  The Colt pistols had already been purchased and the story is still a little murky as to who came up with this idea that the Rangers could use them.  Was it Captain "Jack" or a Texas politician?  It isn't clear if Hays somehow knew that he would use them or, even, how he would use them.  Was it a situation where someone said to Hays "We've got a couple crates of these lying around.  Could you boys use them?" or was it more like Captain Jack saying "I hear you've got crates of repeating arms.  I want them."
The Battle of Walker Creek, June 1, 1844 is the first use of repeating firearms by the Texas Rangers.  I'm not sure if it is the first use ever of repeating firearms in a battle.  The fact that a specific date for this battle is not given seems to me, telling.  The reference cited is to a historical society interested in tourism.  Careful study of the sources also shows a problem.  There is a quote from Captain Jack of tactical significance.  This article has Hays saying to his men “dismount and tie those horses, we can whip them. No doubt about that.”  Compare and contrast that to the descriptions of the Walker Creek Battle.  For the first time in his career Hays has his men stay in the saddle to fight the Comanches.  Even dating back to the Spaniards, tactical doctrine learned through countless battles with the Comanche told leaders that to stay in the saddle was the quickest path to death (See Bird's battle vs. Comanches just outside modern Temple, TX).  Until 1944 the Rangers were not actually cavalry in the traditional sense.  They were mounted infantry.  This may seem a trivial difference but it meant that the Rangers, with their single-shot, muzzle loading weapons, would dismount to fight their opponents.  Under Hays, recruits to his Ranging Companies drilled incessantly on firing in turns.  Hays stressed accuracy to negate the expected numerical superiority of the Comanches.  One group of troopers would be prepared to fire while another reloaded.  The firing group were trained not to actually discharge their weapon until their "buddy" had completely reloaded.  If he failed to follow this procedure and shot too soon, he has just presented an opportunity for the Comanche to attack two, essentially, helpless men. 
The other part of Hays' command, that he wanted his men to "tie those horses" shows Captain Jack's knowledge of mistakes made in previous battles against the Comanches.  See Moore's expedition up Colorado River 1838.  Moore's Lipan Apache scouts located a Comanche village and Moore organized an attack for dawn the following morning.  He had his Lipan scouts spook the Comanches horses (Moore knew full well that the Apache would actually just steal them but the tactical effects are identical.) and then he had the larger portion of his Rangers attack through the village on foot.  Moore's attack was designed to encourage those Comanches who chose to flee to cross a small tributary of the Colorado River upon which the Comanches had camped.  Another portion of Moore's men had an ambush set up on the far side of the creek which would effectively close the kill-box.  Moore had his party's horses tied approximately a mile away.  Moore made two terrible mistakes; he had estimated the population of the camp at around 100.  In reality it was closer to 1000.  Even though this included elderly, women and children, it doomed the operation before it began.  The Lipans completed their assignment perfectly.  A significant portion of the Comanche's herd was, in a stroke, gone.  When Moore began his attack, however, it quickly became obvious that he had bitten off more than his force could chew.  He organized and led his men through one of the most difficult military maneuvers ever; a fighting retreat.  To the Rangers' credit they did not break and run but continued to fight as they gave ground, carrying their dead and wounded with them.  To the Rangers' horror when they arrived where their horses had been tied up they were all gone.  Not only had a group of Comanches located their mounts and taken them, but the Rangers now faced an almost immediate series of Comanche cavalry charges based on the Rangers' stolen mounts, in addition to the constant pressure of Comanches on foot shooting their own muzzle-loading weapons.  Moore's group continued to give ground and keep up their rate of fire until the Comanches broke contact.  Moore's party then had a 150 mile hike dragging 5 wounded on travois with little in the way of food or supplies.
Hays was elevated to command of Ranging companies headquartered in San Antonio shortly after this fight.  There is a way to tie horses, called "hobbling," that allows the animal to graze but prevents almost all movement of their legs.  Think of it like leg irons on a criminal prisoner, they can move some but not very well.  It seems that Hays meant to keep his horses close to avoid Moore's mistake but still planned on fighting this fight in the same way Rangers had trained to fight since their inception.  That's what makes the Walker Creek fight so amazing and unique is Captain Jack's understanding of how best to utilize the new weapons.  I ask you, if Hays' men have weapons that can be fired by one-hand and has a five-shot repeating capability, why would a leader as proficient and tactically savvy as John Coffee Hays order his men out of the saddle?  What advantage would exist by doing so?  Who gets off their horse to fight with a pistol?  You will not be appreciably more accurate firing a pistol from the ground instead of on horse-back and you will have given away your mobility.  If the Rangers did dismount, they would have gone to their long guns per standard operating procedures.
One final clue is the size of the force.  The article quotes the size of Hays' force as fifty men.  The usual complement of a Ranger Company was 20 men.  In instances such as the Battle of Plum Creek which resulted from the pursuit of the Comanche force following the Great Raid of 1840, Ranger companies were often augmented by volunteers.  Rangers usually recruited amongst those whose lives had been affected by the Comanche or other Native groups.  This is one of the many contributing elements of the Rangers esprit de corps.  By signing on young men who longed for revenge, motivation becomes less of a problem.  It is usually replaced by the difficulty in controlling these individuals from committing heinous acts against Comanche dead, wounded or prisoners.  These were hard core groups of men.  The immediate aftermaths of Native raids could see Ranger companies temporarily swell but in "normal" times records of the rolls of different Ranger companies usually show them below even the 20 men they were authorized to carry.  For Hays to lead 50 men simply wasn't normal.  No mention is made that this scout (usually carried out by as few as four men) was as a result of another Comanche raid.  That number is highly dubious for that reason.
I love Wikipedia.  Truly, I do.  This article, in my opinion, should be removed completely.  Perhaps there was a Ranger-Comanche battle at the mouth of Bandera Pass, but I believe I've indicated that no repeating arms could possibly have been used by the Rangers prior to 1844.  The commands that Hays gives indicate tactics used by forces carrying single-shot muzzle-loading weapons.  Given that neither day nor date can be confidently assigned to this battle, though, would seem to warrant that it not be given its own page.
This is the first time I've ever done this.  If I did it wrong, please forgive me.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.28.20.48 (talk) 18:41, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  This battle is apocryphal or a conflation of other battles. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Battle of Bandera Pass. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100305035857/http://www.emayzine.com:80/lectures/Comanche.html to http://emayzine.com/lectures/COMANCHE.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100305035857/http://www.emayzine.com:80/lectures/Comanche.html to http://emayzine.com/lectures/COMANCHE.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:17, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Battle of Bandera Pass. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://emayzine.com/lectures/COMANCHE.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050711082454/http://www.gbso.net/Skyhawk/comanche.htm to http://www.gbso.net/Skyhawk/comanche.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060630175749/http://www.historychannel.com/thcsearch/thc_resourcedetail.do?encyc_id=206146 to http://www.historychannel.com/thcsearch/thc_resourcedetail.do?encyc_id=206146
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080509122616/http://www2.itexas.net/~teddun/tedspage.htm to http://www2.itexas.net/~teddun/tedspage.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.emayzine.com/lectures/Comanche.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:08, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified