A recent post of the Marine Corps Mounted Color Guard on Instagram showed something few may have seen before, and I received a question about it. The photo showed only the mounted color bearers carrying the national and Marine Corps colors without guards.
The question was, “Is this OK?”
Yes, it is.
However, we need to understand why it is OK, and the answer is not limited to the Marine Corps. The same general principle applies when discussing Army cavalry or mounted ceremonial teams. A mounted color presentation is not simply a standard dismounted color guard placed on horses.
That is where the misunderstanding begins.
Just a Color Guard on Top of Horses?
The Marine Corps Mounted Color Guard is an official Marine Corps ceremonial team. Its formation is even mentioned in MCO 5060.20, authorizing the guards to carry the enlisted sword. Army cavalry and mounted ceremonial units (the Caisson Platoon of the 3rd Infantry, The Old Guard) also have their own historical mounted practices for carrying and presenting colors.
That does not mean we take the standard dismounted color guard formation from the service drill manual and simply put it on horses.
A standard dismounted color guard, whether viewed through Army or Marine Corps drill and ceremonies doctrine, normally consists of color bearers and guards. The guards are part of the dismounted formation. They protect the colors, define the formation, and complete the standard ceremonial structure.
Read: https://thedrillmaster.org/2025/08/12/symbolic-protection-of-the-colors/
Mounted practice is different.
The mounted team has to account for the horse, the rider, the staff, the flag, the movement space, the audience, and the safety of everyone involved. The colors must be received, presented, and then transferred in a way that makes sense in a mounted environment. That is a specialized ceremonial system, not a casual variation of a dismounted color guard.
The colors are not merely “handed around.” They are received by the mounted bearers, presented while mounted, and then transferred back to dismounted personnel in a controlled transfer of custody.
That distinction matters.
For more on this subject, read DrillMaster’s Mounted Color Guard Protocols.
The Mounted Team Is a Specialized Ceremonial Element
Mounted color presentations, whether Army or Marine Corps, must be understood as specialized ceremonial elements. They are related to the standard color guard, but they are not identical to the standard manual-defined dismounted color guard.
Horses change the situation. The equipment changes. The movement changes. The safety considerations change. The historical practice changes.
We cannot simply look at a mounted team and say, “The manual shows guards on the outside, so where are they?” That applies a dismounted standard to a mounted ceremonial context.
There is no indication that Army cavalry color presentations or the Marine Corps Mounted Color Guard historically developed as a direct mounted copy of the four-man dismounted color guard. Mounted color presentations come from mounted practice. They are shaped by the realities of moving, controlling, and presenting the colors on horseback.
The established mounted practice may involve mounted color bearers presenting the national color and organizational color without outside mounted guards. When that practice belongs to an official military mounted ceremonial team, it is not automatically improper just because it does not match the dismounted formation in the drill manual.
That is the point people often miss.
The “Missing Guards” Question
The question about missing guards comes from an understandable place. In a standard dismounted color guard, the absence of guards would be a problem. A two-man dismounted color guard carrying the national color and organizational color without guards is not the standard military formation.
But a mounted color presentation is not automatically in that same category.
The mounted bearers are not necessarily “missing” guards in the same way a dismounted color guard would be missing guards. They may be performing within an established mounted ceremonial practice.
That does not mean everyone else gets to do the same thing.
A fire department, police department, veterans organization, school, cadet program, or community color guard cannot point to an Army or Marine Corps mounted presentation and say, “They only used two people, so we can too.” That is not how standards work.
An official mounted military team operates within its own authority and ceremonial context. A local dismounted color guard does not inherit that practice because someone saw a picture online, although that is exactly what happens daily.
Mounted practice is not a blanket exception. It is contextual.
When Guards are Present, Why Swords?
Mounted color guards for the Army and Marine Corps are not simply standard color guards placed on horses. They are adaptations of the dismounted color guard system. That is why we call them Mounted Color Guards and not just simply “color guard on horseback”. That adaptation requires careful thought.
Before discussing swords, we also need to recognize that mounted guards do not have to be armed. When guards are present, they may be unarmed and render the hand salute at the appropriate time. That is a perfectly reasonable mounted adaptation when weapons would create unnecessary safety, handling, or training concerns.
When guards are armed, however, the question becomes: why swords or sabers instead of rifles?
The color bearers must be mounted before taking control of the colors. That is entirely different from the old procedure of a color guard retrieving the colors from the commander’s office. That procedure is not common anymore, but the principle still matters. In a mounted setting, the bearers cannot retrieve the colors themselves and then mount while holding the staffs.
The guards or ground handlers must retrieve the colors, bring them to the mounted color bearers, and then transfer custody of the colors through an established handoff procedure. Only after the colors are secure with the mounted bearers can the guards mount.
The equipment also changes.
Flagstaffs cannot be carried in a harness worn by the bearer. Besides looking awkward, it would create a safety concern for the rider and possibly the horse. The rider must maintain control of the reins, and at least one hand must remain available for that control.
The practical solution is a socket mounted at the right stirrup. The socket supports the staff while allowing the rider to control the horse and maintain a dignified presentation of the colors.
The same practical reasoning applies to the guards’ weapons.
Rifles are traditional for dismounted color guard guards, but they do not work well in the mounted environment. A rifle is long, awkward in weight distribution when handled with one hand, and Present Arms requires two hands. On horseback, that creates an obvious problem. A rifle would most likely have to remain secured in a case attached to the saddle, which defeats the purpose of the guard carrying a ceremonial weapon during the presentation.
The sword or saber solves the problem.
It can be carried and manipulated with one hand, it is appropriate to the mounted ceremonial image, and it is easily recognized by the audience as a ceremonial weapon. In the mounted context, the sword or saber is not used because “cavalry equals sword.” It is used because the mounted color guard is an adaptation, and the weapon must also be adapted to the realities of mounted ceremony.
That is the important point. The sword or saber makes sense while mounted because the entire formation is operating under a mounted ceremonial adaptation. Once the team dismounts, that mounted adaptation ends and the applicable service drill and ceremonies manual controls again.
Receiving, Presenting, and Transferring Custody of the Colors
Mounted teams require a complete system for handling the colors. The colors must be received, presented, and transferred.
I prefer the phrase “transferring custody of the colors” because it accurately describes what is happening. The colors are not being “given away.” They are not being casually passed off. Control and responsibility are being transferred from one ceremonial element to another.
For example, after the mounted presentation, the colors may be handed off to dismounted guards or handlers before the mounted bearers dismount. That sequence makes sense. The bearers should not attempt to dismount while still responsible for controlling the staffs and colors.
The transfer allows the colors to remain controlled, protected, and dignified throughout the sequence.
This is another reason mounted teams cannot be viewed as if they are merely dismounted color guards on horseback. A proper mounted ceremony must account for mounted control, staff control, horse movement, rider and public safety, and the dignity of the colors.
Proper adaptation is not the same as making things up.
The problem comes when others imitate only the visible portion of the ceremony without understanding the structure behind it. They see mounted color bearers and assume the standard has changed. It has not. They are seeing a specialized mounted practice within a specific context.
What Happens When the Team Dismounts?
This is where another important distinction comes in.
Mounted context allows for mounted ceremonial practice. Once the team dismounts, that mounted context no longer controls everything the team does. The specialized protocol governing mounted adaptations terminates when the team is no longer mounted. On foot, the team reverts to standard infantry drill and ceremonies doctrine as dictated by TC 3-21.5 and MCO 5060.20.
That matters in two critical ways.
First, the authority for guards to carry swords or sabers disappears.
Shown here is the 1st Cavalry Division’s color guard. The team is using two hands as if there are strong winds, they are not marching at Close Interval, and the guards are armed with Sabers. All not authorized under Army doctrine.
MCO 5060.20 mentions the Marine Corps Mounted Color Guard and authorizes the guards to carry the enlisted sword in that mounted context. Army mounted practice may also involve sabers in a mounted ceremonial context. However, that authority is tied to the mounted function.
Once the team is dismounted and is no longer functioning as a mounted color guard or mounted ceremonial element, the mounted sword or saber authority does not automatically follow the guard onto the ground.
For both the Army and Marine Corps, dismounted color guard guards do not carry swords. They carry rifles. That is the standard under each service’s drill and ceremonies doctrine. The guards’ weapons must be capable of being brought to the positions of Carry and Present Arms in precise synchronization with the colors. Swords and sabers do not meet that requirement for dismounted color guard escort personnel under Army and Marine Corps doctrine. They are ceremonial weapons for officers and noncommissioned officers in specific command or ceremonial roles, not for dismounted color guard guards.
A Marine mounted guard with an enlisted sword is authorized as part of the mounted team’s specialized function, but the guard for a dismounted Marine Corps color guard does not keep that sword authority simply because he was mounted a few moments earlier. This is why sword scabbards should be mounted to the saddle.
The same principle applies to Army personnel. A saber may be appropriate in a mounted cavalry context, but when the team dismounts and functions as a dismounted color guard, the applicable Army dismounted standard controls. The mounted authority ends with the mounted function unless the service has provided separate authority for dismounted use (there isn’t any).
Second, the structure changes.
While a mounted team may have flexibility based on equestrian safety, spacing, movement, and the established practice of that mounted unit, a dismounted team must return to the applicable dismounted color guard structure. The variance permitted in the saddle does not walk onto the parade deck.
That means a dismounted Marine Corps color guard returns to the standard color guard formation required by Marine Corps doctrine. The same principle applies to Army formations under Army doctrine. Once on foot, the team is no longer operating under the practical allowances of mounted ceremony. It is operating as a dismounted ceremonial formation.
This is not nitpicking. It is how ceremonial authority works.
A formation, weapon, position, or procedure may be authorized in one setting and unauthorized in another. The fact that something is proper while mounted does not make it proper once dismounted.
Mounted Practice Is Not a Blanket Exception
This is the part many people miss.
A mounted color guard is an adaptation. It is not a license to ignore doctrine. It is also not a universal exception that can be copied by any organization in any setting.
The Marine Corps Mounted Color Guard has authority because it is an official Marine Corps ceremonial team with an established mounted function. Army mounted ceremonial teams operate within Army authority, history, and mounted practice. Their mounted procedures do not automatically create permission for unrelated teams to omit guards, carry swords, carry sabers, add flags, remove flags, or invent a new dismounted color guard structure.
The question should always be: What is the authority for this formation in this context?
If the team is mounted, the mounted ceremonial context must be considered. If the team is dismounted, the service drill and ceremonies manual applies. If the organization is civilian, then it must determine what standard it has adopted and apply it consistently.
What cannot happen is this: an organization sees an official Army or Marine Corps mounted practice, removes it from its context, and uses it to justify an unrelated dismounted formation.
That is not doctrine. That is imitation without understanding.
The Correct Way to Describe Mounted Teams
Wording matters here.
I would not say the Marine Corps Mounted Color Guard, or an Army mounted color presentation, is “not a true color guard.” That can sound as if the team is somehow illegitimate, and that is not the case.
The better way to say it is this:
A mounted color guard is not a standard manual-defined dismounted color guard.
That is the whole point.
It may be official. It may be proper. It may be historically grounded. It may also be specialized, and specialization has limits.
The mounted color bearers may properly present the national color and organizational color without guards when that is the established practice of an official mounted team. But that does not create permission for dismounted teams to omit guards. It does not authorize dismounted sword or saber guards. It does not erase the standards in the service drill manuals.
Both things can be true.
Mounted ceremony has its own context. Once the team is on foot, the mounted exception ends and dismounted doctrine controls.
Apply the Correct Standard
When we evaluate ceremony, we have to apply the correct standard to the correct situation. The dismounted color guard formation in the manual is not automatically the standard for every possible mounted presentation of the colors.
So, yes, the Marine Corps Mounted Color Guard presenting only the national and Marine Corps colors with mounted color bearers can be acceptable. The same principle can apply to Army mounted ceremonial teams when they are operating within established mounted practice.
They are not missing guards in the same way a standard dismounted color guard would be missing guards. They are performing as mounted ceremonial elements with their own context.
But that does not create a free-for-all.
It does not mean everyone else gets to omit guards whenever convenient. It does not mean swords or sabers are authorized once the team dismounts. It does not mean a mounted exception transfers into dismounted doctrine.
Context matters.
Without context, we end up correcting something that was never wrong, or worse, copying something official and using it incorrectly somewhere else.
Written and originally posted June 4, 2026. Completely rewritten and reposted June 22, 2026.