Gwynne does a good job of pointing out the high casualty rate among the early Ranging Companies, about 50% a year. But given their aggressive tactics; commonly tracking and assaulting larger groups of Indians head-on, perhaps that is no surprise.
Also noted as per Gwynne how such an enviroment and such heavy casualties could further make them "een rougher, more brutal, and more aggressive".
Gwynn, like Fehrenbach, makes much of the arrival of the revolver in changing the balance of power, but I aint convinced. It is worth noting that, on the "official" inauguration of the revolver against Comanches at Walker's Creek in 1844, wherein fifteen Rangers attacked seventy-five Comanches (not unusual odds even in the 1830's, see Erath's account above), the Rangers at Walker's Creek suffered four men down.
IIRC three of those lived, but that surely was just by chance from not actually having been struck in a vital spot. And just as surely two or three Walker's Creeks a year could easily whittle Hays Rangers down by half, even with revolvers.
I do think one part of the Ranger legend is a tad overblown, re: the way the Texas Rangers travelled and camped. Gwynne writes....
Each man had a rifle, two pistols, and a knife. He had a Mexican blanket secured behind his saddle. That was all.
Like Comanches, the Rangers often travelled by moonlight navigating by river courses and the north star, and dispensing with fires altogether, making "cold camps" and eating hardtack or other uncooked rations.
Hays men would sleep fully clothed and fully armed, ready to fight at a minute's notice. They crossed rivers even in freezing weather, swimming by the side of their horses.
None of this behavior had any precedent in American military history. No cavalry anywhere could bridle and saddle a horse faster than the Rangers. Pardon me, does no one else still make cold camps, eat uncooked rations and sleep with weapons at hand? Sounds about like any number of motorcycle trips I've been on, and any number of times me and the missus have crashed out in the woods.
Also, for the "none of this behavior had any precedent" part; I would say the ultimate of historical frontier military hardship that I know of was George Rogers Clark's taking of Fort Vicennes in February of 1779. CLark and his men basically marching through heavy rains across frigid, ankle deep floodwaters for more than 200 miles. Towards the end they traversed deeper spots up to their shoulders, and continued on for two days of this without any food at all, right before going into battle.
Amazing that ANY survived that ordeal to meet the British....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_campaignOf the Texas Rangers, what CAN be said is that they merely followed standard wilderness travelling procedures for moving though country where danger was expected. The same sort of things that men, women and children all over this continent had been doing forever.
Only us would make a production out of this.
Birdwatcher
