MovieChat Forums > Il buono, il brutto, il cattivo (1967) Discussion > The alcoholic Union captain at the bridg...

The alcoholic Union captain at the bridge seems to have a huge command

posted 8 years ago by jeffyoung1
6 replies | jump to latest

Does anyone here think that the alcoholic Union captain at the bridge was in charge of a lot of soldiers for his rank?

Given the size of the Union force on the opposite end of the bridge, it would seem that a full colonel would be in command. But here's a mere captain in charge. Typically an American infantry company would number at full strength around 210 to 240 men, given three platoons of approximately 32 men apiece, plus a headquarters section or platoon, and a supporting element. The size of the Union force at the bridge appeared to be at least battalion size or larger. I think probably a regiment was stationed at the bridge.

Each time I watch the movie, I feel sympathy for the alcoholic Union captain. I believe he was an alcoholic not because of himself but he was in despair at the needless waste of human lives and was therefore self-medicating with alcohol to cope with it. I don't excuse his alcoholism but I understand where he's coming from and despite it all, he comes across as a decent, good man.

[–] philosophers_legacy 8 years ago

I always figured their Colonel and Major were recently killed. Leaving him in command.

[–] Captain_Augustus_McCrae 8 years ago

That is a very reasonable possibility. In such a situation- not at all uncommon during the Civil War- the regimental command would pass to the senior captain. Given time for the bureaucracy to catch up, divisional command would either send a new colonel to assume command of the regiment, or, more likely, simply brevet the captain up to colonel.

"It ain't dying I'm talking about, it's LIVING!"
Captain Augustus McCrae

[–] philosophers_legacy 8 years ago

Exactly. It's not like they could radio Command and let them know what's up.

[–] sjankis630 7 years ago

I know he is only a Captain but I am currently reading American Ulysses the biography of US Grant and I can't help thinking that Leone having a drunk commander is not somehow some omage to General Grant. According to this biographer he was not as big a drunk as some would have him be.

[–] TheGoodMan19 7 years ago

Colonel Edward Canby, Union commander in the New Mexico Campaign, never had more than 5,000 to 6,000 under his command. A little more than 1,000 of which was regular infantry, dressed out in complete blue uniforms. Most of his forces were cavalry and volunteer infantry raised in New Mexico and Colorado Territories. They probably wouldn't have had complete uniforms, but I did notice some of the pickets that capture Blondie and Tuco aren't in uniform.

The Union forces also have siege guns and mortars, neither of which would not have been sent to US military installations on the southwest. The forces there would have prized mobility on fighting natives and heavy artillery pieces would have been an encumbrance.

Your future's all used up.

[–] MAGolding (1096) 5 years ago

During the US Civil war the standard size of of a company was about 100 men, and a new unit at regulation strength would quickly lose men for various reasons. A 19th century US army company typically had about 40 to 60 men available for duty.

This makes the discrepancy between the normal command of a captain and the number of soldiers shown even greater. I don't remember how many soldiers were seen at the bridge but they did seem like a lot more than 40 to 60 men.

This trivia at IMDB says that there could have been many hundreds of extras portraying Union soldiers in those scenes:

"Shot in the Spanish desert, with 1,500 Spanish soldiers as extras."

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060196/trivia?ref_=tt_trv_trv