Confederate Sharpshooters

[ES1861]

Gentlemen,

I need info on sniper sights which were used on rifle muskets during the Civil War. There were probably many different styles both optic and non optic peep hole sights. Does anybody have any idea on what they were like?


All help appreciated,

Eric Seppälä

[Johan Steele]

I think you'll find that the majority of Sharpshooters both North & South used standard iron sites. For instance, as I understand it, the majority of Sharps Rifles used by the USSS used standard ladder sites. While some used the brass scopes that are so over represented in the mainstream community they were expensive and fragile and thus quite rare on the CW battlefield. I'm not certain how common Vernier & Creedmore sites were; I'm not certain how available they were.

At least one Regiment of Ohio Sharpshooters carried standard Spencer Rifles. And did just fine w/ them... in fact proving to be succesful "assassin hunters" in the skirmish role.

The Whitworth & Kerr rifles of CSA use were quite scarce and only the best shooters used them. The standard Whitworth also used a ladder site. The majority of CSA Sharpshooters carried standard Enfield's. I've recently seen an original Whitworth that had been "sporterized" at some point of it's lifetime and was told that it was really no more accurate at 400 yds than a standard Enfield, it came into it's own at longer ranges. The owner said that he had often hit a man sized target center mass at better than 1000 yards.

What you may be thinking of are the variety of "American Rifles." Having seen one last weekend that had been used/owned by a member of 2nd USSS who settled in Iowa I was truly startled by the size and weight of the weapon. It was likely close to thirty pounds and massive. It was a beautiful weapon w/ a very intricate vernier rear site and hooded front site. This would not have been a weapon used in skirmishing or combat except for in fixed fighting from fortifications. The condition of the rifle proved to me that if it was legitimate it had never seen active campaign... I wouldn't want to do a route march w/ that monster. I have my suspicions about the authenticity of it's lineage... though it was a beautiful piece.

Most Sharpshooters were little more than professional skirmishers. As issued iron sites on an Enfield or Sharps are more than adequate for battlefield skirmishing & Sharpshooting which would rarely if ever exceed four hundred yards. The reputation & treatment as "assasins & murderers" that many Sharpshooters received was bad enough that I think few would have wished to draw more attention to themselves than neccesary in the event they were captured.

[LWhite64]

Well there were really only two types of scopes that were used during the war, and neither of them on Rifled Muskets. There was the long type scope that was fited on many target/bench rifles, these were very heavy weapons, weighing between 20 to 50 lbs. Then there was the Davidson scope used on the Whitworth Rifles, the Davidson was 14 inches in length and fited on the side of the Whitworth.

Lee

[Yellowhammer]

Here is a picture of an original target rifle that was used by US Sharpshooters on the York/James Peninsula in 1862. It currently resides in the collection of the National Firearms Museum in Fairfax, VA.

http://imagescommerce.bcentral.com/merchantfiles/5051935/shooter21.jpg

This site is optical and is of the first pattern that Lee is referring to. It is an excellent example and anyone interested in sharpshooting should pay a visit to that museum as they have that target rifle, a CS-id'd Whitworth, a Colt Revolving rifle with Berdan's provenance, and several Sharps rifles with at least one having belonged to Hiram Berdan himself.

[Pvt Schnapps]

Gentlemen,

I need info on sniper sights which were used on rifle muskets during the Civil War. There were probably many different styles both optic and non optic peep hole sights. Does anybody have any idea on what they were like?


All help appreciated,

Eric Seppälä

In his short story "One of the Missing," Ambrose Bierce describes the weapon of his protagonist, the "scout" Jerome Searing, as "an ordinary 'Springfield,' but fitted with a globe sight and hair-trigger." It's an interesting detail, and not really necessary to the story, so I've always assumed its veracity.

You can read the whole story here: http://www.classicreader.com/read.php/sid.6/bookid.1160/

[kemper_rifles]

Speaking for Confederate sharpshooting, as Mr. Steele pointed out, the majority used standard Enfields. Whitworths were usually awarded in limited numbers to only the best of shots. You might want to check out "Lee's Sharpshooters", by Major W.S. Dunlop. It was published in 1889. The author was an officer in the sharpshooter battalion of McGowan's brigade, ANV circa 1864.

[GreencoatCross]

From "The Civil War Diary of Wyman S. White, First Sergeant, Co. F 2nd U.S. Sharpshooters," edited by Russel White.

Sgt. White was using a "telescope rifle" around June 1864, as he was detailed for sharpshooting duty while the rest of his regiment stayed in the works. He noted that he had to get the rifle from the baggage wagons and leave his Sharps in the target rifle box.

To pick up on pg. 248 in White's memoirs, "At that time I was using a telescope breech loading rifle that weighed thirty pounds and someone came to use and wanted me to try my rifle on the man they could not hit or silence. I went and as soon as I brought my rifle's telescope to bear on the mystery, I saw that it was the body of a dead rebel lashed up to a tree and a live rebel Sharpshooter was behind the tree doing his best to pick off the Yankees that were sending bullets into his dead comrade hung up beside the tree that covered him."

Throughout the summer 1864 period, Sgt. White notes using the special breechloading scoped rifle, in all cases being sent out by himself to silence rebel artillery batteries or sharpshooters along the lines near the 2nd Corps. In one occasion Sgt. White was trying to get across a corn field so he could hit a rebel battery on a far hill, and he met an Indian sharpshooter. White told the Indian his problem and the Indian then said, "make self corn," before cutting stalks and placing them in his uniform and equipment. Sgt. White and the Indian, disguised in this camoflague, crawled across the field and achieved their desired cover on the other side before driving off the rebel battery.

Appendix 1 in Sgt. White's memoirs is as follows:

"THE TELESCOPIC SIGHTED SHARPSHOOTER RIFLE.
There was in use, a very heavy rifle, with a telescopic sight, used for special sharpshooting. There were not many of these rifles but they were assigned to those soldiers considered to be the best shots. The soldier had a special wooden case for the rifle. When the unit moved, he had to take the rifle to the case at the wagon train and put the rifle in it, for transportation. The rifle weighed 34 pounds. When he put away the telescopic sighted rifle, he took up his Sharps rifle again and moved with the troops until a special duty required the use of the large long range rifle again.

The charge for loaded the telescopic rifle was four inches of black powder, a good flannel wad, a lead bullet and weighed an ounce or more than an ounce that was wedged into the grooves of the rifling inside by use of a false muzzle. When fire from the percussion cap hit the charge, it would send the bullet more than a mile and do good execution. The rifle fired greater distances and more accurately than the Sharps Rifles were capable of doing.

In the book "Berdan's U.S. Sharpshooters in the Army of the Potomac, 1861-1865," the author, C.A. Stevens, explains in an incident in the First Regiment, the high regard in which those using such rifles were held. "Harrison's Creek, June 16th, 1864. One of the first men shot on taking this position was James Heath, of Michigan, who carried a 34 pound telescopic rifle, the heaviest in the regiment, and which, as he went down, fell with a heavy blow in the middle of the road. The rifle was immediately turned over to James Ragin, of Wisconsin, who was sent to the rear by Captain Wilson, to put it through repair before attempting to use it. The giving of these telescopic rifles, but a few of which were now carried at this period of service, was in the nature of a mark of honor, as the sharpshooter thus armed was considered an independent character, used only for special services, with the privilege of going to any part of the line where in his own judgement he could do the most good. It is therefore sufficient in naming the men carrying these ponderdous rifles, to show that they were among our most trusted and best shots." It is to be noted that at the Battle of Burnside's Mine, 30th July, 1864, Ragin was wounded in the left arm. The rifle was then assigned to Frederick H. Johnson of Company B. He was from New York City.

In the foregoing manuscript, it will be noted that Wyman S. White had been assigned one of these telescopic rifles and had used it for an extended period of time with, according to him, quite excellent results. It will also be noted that he operated at times as an independent marksman in various parts of the line where he thought he could do the most good."

Now, there is quite a large breech-loading SHARPS target rifle in Gettysburg that looks appealing...perhaps it is the same style as used by Sgt. White in 1864? Aside from that and many other unknown origin target rifles I've seen many identified USSS-used rifles, all of which have scopes mounted on top. Some known varieties used by the U.S. Sharpshooters are Bristlen-Morges (similar to the Waadtlander, a beautiful Swiss-made match-rifle), James, Billinghurst, and Morgan. Early in the war, before the Colt-Root Revolving Rifles were issued, the men carried their own personal rifles which they brought from home, and those were probably a staggering variety, each one tuned to individual tastes.

There is another account in White's memoirs where he noted that notched sticks were tied together and set up in front of the rifles and used as "rough" ladder sights. The men messed with the hand-made sights until they found a suitable range, then all of the men opened up at the target...they did not wound or kill anyone but the bullets falling around the ground scared the rebels away.

Oh yeah, the chaplain of the 2nd U.S.S.S., Lorenzo Barber, carried his own personal scoped target rifle into some skirmishes. Barber was wounded shortly after ranging some rebel works....in doing so he found a wild pig running in front of the works, shot at the pig until he killed it to find the range, and as he announced what the range was he was shot.

Brian White

[country rifle]

Fellow Enthusiasts,

You will have a hard time finding "rifle muskets" with anything but standard sights. Rifle muskets were in use by all sorts of marksmen both North & South and those weapons had standard sights. Too many fellows feel that they have to have a "Sharpshooter Rifle" in order to portray a sharpshooter since that is the weapon all sharpshooters carried. This is a mistake many have made.

As stated earlier it appears that telescopic sights were not as common as the other types of sights available which may have been due to cost and durability concerns. This is not to say that telescopic sights were rare because that would be incorrect as well.

When speaking of specialty weapons such as hand crafted target rifles, country rifles, hunting rifles and bench rifles, then you do find the more exotic types of sights such as globe and telescopic.

However, for every unit of Sharpshooters you find carrying weapons with special sights you will also find those armed with standard sights. For instance the men of the Western Sharpshooters(aka 14th MO, 66th IL) were issued plains style rifles equipped with rear ladder sights and blade front sights. Men of the 1st Regiment Michigan Sharpshooters carried Springfields although there is some evidence which points to a special type. Men of the 64th IL(Yates SS) started out with Mississippis.

As a general rule I would avoid trying to equip any standard "rifle musket" with any sort of non-standard sight. Many folks have gone a little far and have placed telescopic sights on Springfields, Enfields and Sharps which is possible but not very probable. To date I have not found any evidence that Springfields, Enfields or Sharps rifles were fitted with telescopic sights.

If you have your heart set on having a rifle with some sort of special sight then you will need to look towards the purchase of a civilian style weapon. No, not a CVA or any of those other modern style contraptions but one which is more true to form of the weapons of the period. There are some current commercial models available but very few.

Hope this helps.

Sincerely,

Robert Leinweber
Independent Company Sharpshooters

[FedOfficer]

While we're talking sharpshooter stuff, does anyone know when the range finding device that worked by placing a string between the teeth, then extending the brass frame until the string was tight and then sliding a bar down the frame until it was the height of the man you were looking at was invented? It had a graduated scale along the side of the brass frame and the range was indicated by where the sliding bar was on the frame. Was it used in the CW? Any first hand accounts? I know I've read of an account somewhere, but can't remember the details or war.

Dixie Gun Works lists a heavy barrel civilian type target rifle, European, I think Swiss. Is this close to what the heavy barrelled sharpshooter guns were?

Rick Rachal

[marlin teat]

While we're talking sharpshooter stuff, does anyone know when the range finding device that worked by placing a string between the teeth, then extending the brass frame until the string was tight and then sliding a bar down the frame until it was the height of the man you were looking at was invented? It had a graduated scale along the side of the brass frame and the range was indicated by where the sliding bar was on the frame. Was it used in the CW? Any first hand accounts? I know I've read of an account somewhere, but can't remember the details or war.

Dixie Gun Works lists a heavy barrel civilian type target rifle, European, I think Swiss. Is this close to what the heavy barrelled sharpshooter guns were?

Rick Rachal

The range finding device is called a stadia and variants on it have been around as there have been weapons that shot projectiles. I have read of crude stadia fashioned from notched sticks and string.

According to most of the accounts that I have read, the ability to judge distance unaided was one of the main qualifications for true sharpshooter status and was one of the skills most worked on.

Just me, but I wouldn't bother with a stadia. Just something else to carry and loose.

[Pvt Schnapps]

Mr. Teat makes a good point.

A brass stadia can make a nice conversation piece with spectators. Also, Tim O'Neill's staff notes on the CWLHI site include instructions for making a crude stadia from a pencil and string, which is also kind of neat. But neither have much practical value, nor did they at the time, as we read in this excerpt from one of my favorite bedside browsing books, Scott's Military Dictionary:

"STADIA. A very simple aid in estimating distances, consists of a small stick, held vertically in the hand at arm's length, and bringing the top of a man's head in line with the top of the stick, noting where a line from the eye of the observer to the feet of the man cuts the stick, or stadia, as it is called. To graduate the stadia, a man of the ordinary height of a foot-soldier, say 5 ft. 8 in., is placed at a known distance, say 50 yards; and the distance on the stick covered by him when it is held at arm's length is marked and divided into 8 equal parts. If the distance is now increased, until the man covers only one of these divisions, we know he is at a distance equal to 50 yds. X 8 = 400 yards. This instrument is not very accurate, except for short distances. A much more accurate stadia is constructed by making use of a metal plate, having a slit in it in the form of an isosceles triangle, the base of which, held at a certain distance from the edge, subtends a man, -(5 ft. 8 in.) say at the distance of 100 yards. A slider, ab, (Fig. 215,) moves along the triangle, being always parallel to the base, AB, and the length of it comprised between the two FIG. 215. sides of the triangle, represents the height of men at different distances, which are marked in yards on the side of the triangle, above or below, according as the object looked at is a foot soldier or horse man. In order to keep the stadia always at the same distance from the eye, a string is attached to the slider, the opposite end having a knot tied in it, which is held between the teeth while using the instrument, which is held in the right hand, the slider being moved with the left-hand finger. The string should always be kept stretched when the instrument is used, and the line AB in a vertical position. It must be graduated experimentally, by noting the positions in which the slider a b represents the height of the object. The instrument used is not, however, reliable. Its uncertainty increases in an equal ratio with the distance of the object observed. At the extreme ranges it is quite useless. At the school for firing at Vincennes, therefore, they rely entirely on the eye alone for the judgment of distances, and great pains by careful practice and instruction is taken to perfect that judgment. A simple instrument by which distances can be determined is, therefore, still a great desideratum. The prismatic teliometer of M. Porro, of the Sardinian army, is however the best measurer of distances that has been yet invented. It is described in Wilcox's Rifle Practice."

There's a link to Scott's Dictionary on the Drill Network site, which I heartily recommend.

Also, Kautz's Customs of Service for NCOs and Soldiers contains practical tips for estimating range without mechanical aids, which a sharpshooter would more likely know.

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo Kameraden!

IMHO, stadia sights for riflemen are a very good training tool, but the "Skill set" of a shootist lies with his ability:

1. to know the peformance behavior of his weapon
2. to accurately determine distance/range over open and broken ground
3. to determine and adjust to wind conditions
4. to determine and adjust to light conditions

To be overly brief, as originally envisioned by Hiram Berdan- the U.S. Sharpshooters were to have been a corps of Sharps M1853 "Sporting Rifle" armed, to use the period-incorrect term, "snipers."
However, that, for the most part, never happened and the Sharpshooters became mostly skirmishers and scouts.

Initially, potential recruits were encouraged to show up for the "shooting trials" with their own preferred, and accustomed to, target rifles- for which they were to be paid a $60 bounty when accepted and mustered in (never paid).
U.S. Ordnance chief James Ripley did not want to pay for the Shaprs target rifles, and thought the M1861 Springfield would be best. Beran agreed, but later admitted to PA Governor Curtin that he saw the M1861's as a temporary measure until the breechloaders could be obtained).

Regarding sights, Berdan wrote on September 25, 1861:

"In my judgment, the best sights for this service are the plain, open types, consisitng of a notch sight (on the barrel), a silver pin at the muzzle, and a windage globe sight at the breech. The open sight would be convenient in obscure places, while the globe sight would be used with good light."

By and large, and at the risk of making too broad a sweeping statement- the "target rifles" were designated for the few best shots in each company and stored in their boxes until a special "sniping" (to use the modern term) need or "assignment" came up.

The state of Ohio did not "kick into" the 1st and 2nd U.S.S.S., but rather raised its own 10 independent companies of sharp-shooters. (Oddly enough, Berdan had tried the Spencer rifle- which malfunctioned and burned his face during a trial- so Sharps moved up the list otherwise "Berdan's" might have been a Spencer rifle-armed unit.)

IMHO, I believe some of this "sharpshooter hobby lore" (with historicaly documented cases so noted as exceptions) can be traced back to a fictional 1920's article in CENTURY magazine where a Union "sniper" kills a Confederate general from over a mile off.
This was reborn, I believe on TV on "The Man and the Challenge" series around 1959-1960 in time for the Civil War Centennial. (And still circulates around some campfires today...Plus I was standing next to some Berdan's at Antietam 135 as they were educating the public as to how the six inch long Sharps bullet in the Sharps Rifle could hit targets at 1800 yards.)

As a result, it has been moved from fiction to history, and have a part to play in so-called farb and so- called mainstream "Berdan" overuse of incorrect
Italian "Hawkin/Hawken" rifle clones as well as brass telescoped versions of the same.

The U.S. actually dabbled in "sniper sights."

The first versions of the U.S. M1855 Rifles, the two brass mounted versions,
with the long nosecap had their "implement box" (patchbox) mortised for a screw on, "Figure Eight" front sight.
This consisted of a large bottom half of the "eight" that slipped over the muzzle. Its smaller top half contianed cross wire.

I once built an early (1857-1858) brass mounted and browned barrelled M1855 rifle with such a sight attachment. For shooting, I found the "figure eight front sight" to be next to worthless. (As did the Ordnance folks, who dropped it in 1859.)

I own an original "James" style target .45 rifle, dated 1865 and made by O. B. Vandenburgh in Findlay, Ohio with a 2X brass long "scope." (See the above picture.)

Period telescopic sights are often 1X, 2X, or at best 4X- which does not "do too much" for reaching out and touching someone (in the modern context).

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt
Company "C," 7th Independent Company Ohio Volunteer Sharpshooters
Company "A," 1st U.S.S.S. (LH) Mess

[country rifle]

Rick,

REPRO STADIAS
The boys with Company G, 1st USSS of the NSSA out of Wisconsin are reproducing and selling very nice copies of the brass stadias. I as well as many of my fellow riflemen own one. It makes a nice conversation piece to display to the public but not very practical under combat conditions. According to the period manuals the stadia was more of a status symbol or an item of ornamentation than a relaible means bt which to estimate distance. To date I have not found any first hand accounts regarding the use of a stadia in combat by Sharpshooters.

Drop me an email and I will give you a contact for the stadias.
rkl@casscomm.com

RANGE ESTIMATION
As stated correctly by others the ability to accurately estimate distances is crucial to the success of a rifleman. This ability should not rest on the use of an instrument such as the stadia. Instead it should be a skill developed by each rifleman without dependence upon an instrument. Musketry manuals of the 1860's give basic information on how to estimate distances through the identification of details visible upon a target at various distances. Atmospheric conditions are also discussed such as background and elevation. Interestingly the manuals of the 1890's have an additional form of range estimation using the speed of sound.

Having said all of this it is still neat to have a repro stadia as part of a display.

RIFLES
Since I have not seen the rifle you are speaking of for sale at Dixie I cannot comment on whether or not it is proper. The best advice I can give is to view as many photos of period target/sporting rifles so you can get a feel for what one looks like. Hands on inspection of originals is even better. After a while you will be able to identify the details which make a weapon look like it is of the period. Details to look for will include types of sights, shape of the stock, bolster design, style of trigger guard and lock plate style. Additionally, the type of rifle you want to carry can and should also reflect what part of the country you are from as well as what unit you portray. Probably the best way to go is to obtain a sporting rifle with simple sights of period design which will work for any theater of operations.

Hope this helps.

Sincerely,

Rob Leinweber
Independent Company Sharpshooters

[FedOfficer]

Thanks for the great replies.

Rick Rachal

[Secede1863]

I have a quick question;

Someone I know from my first unit, a "farb" unit, has a standard Enfield rifle with a very long metal "scope" the scope is stainless steel (I know that is wrong...) and is completely hollow, and besides the fact it jigles and cannot come off, it does nothing. Is this correct? Please inform if so. If questions about it please ask Ill tell you what I know about his gun.

Your Pard

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo Kamerad!

"Someone I know from my first unit, a "farb" unit, has..."

To be polite, shouldn't your question end there? ;-)

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt

[Secede1863]

AH!

Sorry, I get it now.

If you read my before edited post I didnt know what you meant. Well, yes it should. But he says he can back it up. Can He?

Your Pard

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo Kamerad!

"But he says he can back it up. Can He?"

In general and in particular, in two decades, man and boy in this "hobby-" I have never met an individual who did NOT claim he had "the documentation,"
had "done the research," had "the period evidence, accounts, descriptions, image, and/or artifacts to back their claim.

I obviously do not know this individual, and would not want or care to paint him with the broad brush of past personal experience on my part that might just have been skewed toward the 100% negative.... but

We should be glad to post and share the fruits of his labors here on the AC Forum, so that, in the sharing, we may all learn something and further our collective CW knowledge.

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo Kameraden!

This is a test of my woefully inadequate PC skills:

http://www.sharpsburg-arsenal.com/Firearms_Ammo/US_Stadia/us_stadia.html

If someone knows the spell to have the images appear here, please pitch in.
Danke!

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt
Luddite Mess

[bcatgrappler]

this may be a stupid question, but I am royally confused, Were the green sharpshooters "dress" uniforms for any field use whatsoever, or did they wear regulation fed fatigue dress out in the field?

Thanks,

Mike Ray
Ruff n' Readys

[Michigander]

this may be a stupid question, but I am royally confused, Were the green sharpshooters "dress" uniforms for any field use whatsoever, or did they wear regulation fed fatigue dress out in the field?

Thanks,

Mike Ray
Ruff n' Readys

Mike;
:)
These boys were not known as "greencoats" for no reason. From my research both regiments of USSS generaly wore their green frock coats with either green pants, or standard issue federal blue trousers. At times they were issued blue sack coats, and many photos show these troops wearing both. That being said in general the USSS wore their green frocks. Remember these guys considered themselves "elite" troops, and the green frocks were a symbol of their status as well as a usefull means of camoflage. They were considered the best skirmishers in the army, and their skill, esprit, and ability to use available cover and camoflage all contributed to this reputation. Hope this helps.

Richard Jones
Yucaipa, CA

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo Kameraden!

Jah und nein!

As with any unit, this conversation is very "time and place" specific!

The popular image and "hobby version" of Berdan Sharpshooters tends to be fixated on their Peninsula Campaign era (July 1862) appearance with the "classic" green cap with short ostrich plume, green dress coat, sky blue trousers, "Prussian" knapsack and mess kit, and leather leggings. Or, their late 1862/early 1863 appearance with green trousers.

To be too brief:

Research into period documents such as Quartermaster reports, diaries, and journals shows a different "look."

1. As the initial unique 1861 items (Prussian knapasacks, mess kits, wore out, or were lost in combat, they were not replaced. (Replacements and "future" issuances being standard infantry issue.)

2. The green dress coats were turned in for the "summer campaign" season and blue infantry blouses (along with sky blue trousers) issued as early as 1862 (with the coats reissued in the Fall).

3. Even when "green" was supposed to be issued, shortages sometimes made "blue" the issuance- to the complaint of the men worried about a double "hit" to their clothing allowances.

4. At times, particularly in 1864, "green" clothing was in surplus and unissued at the arsenal/depot.

Again to be brief, with the possible exception, maybe, of some surviving green caps, the apperance of the Berdan's/Post's at Pitzer's Woods or Big Round Top at Gettysburg would have looked much more like Sharps rifle-armed Federal infantry than the "greencoated Berdans" always depicted in popular art and image.

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt
Berdan Heretic Mess
Company "A," 1st USSS (LH)

(Yes, there are couple or three "hardcore/authentic" Berdans out there...)
;-)

[Marc]

Must agree with Curt's and all comments. Our unit does quite a few living histories at Gettysburg NMP. We try and have the fellows in a multitude of Sharpshooter Uniforms even though the complete green sharpshooter was not at Gettysburg. The park does like to have us in the green frocks since that is what the public recognizes and opens the door for questions etc.

When we do the firing demo..I have usually 3 fellows stand in front of the crowd. One representing the Berdan sharpshooter of 1862, green frock, hair on knapsack, leggings etc and I tell the crowd this is the sharpshooter of 1862. then we go into details how the uniform would vary depending on supply and time of year etc and that is where the other 2 fellows come in, with double bag knapsack, blue sack coat, perhaps green pants etc.

Now at a time specific authentic event the correct uniform is a must.

Anyways, still trying to find out exactly when the Chancellorsville new issue took palce and what regiments received them.

[GreencoatCross]

My mess, through a ton of research, managed to create what we think is a fair "matrix" of clothing issuances throughout the 1st and 2nd USSS's terms of service, including what the majority of men wore at precise moments in the war. Bill Skillman and I are still scouring our current sources and looking for more so we can complete this matrix and add to it throuout the years to come. It's always an on-going project.

Chancellorsville: Remember that the men were issued brand new, full suits of green in early 1863 for the inspection by Lincoln, and soon after that they recieved orders to march which turned out to be the Chancellorsville Campaign. So far we have accounts of men going into the Wilderness carrying knapsacks stuffed with spare green clothing, some men however left their spare clothing, overcoats, and extra blankets in camp (buried in boxes, as per Wyman White's account). There is further evidence from some recent diary discoveries that at least one Sharpshooter in the 1st Regt. wore a blouse after he tossed away his knapsack; does this mean he and others were issued blouses AND uniform coats, and he simply stowed his green coat in his knapsack which he tossed away? He did make note that he had nothing else to cover him at night, but later on in his diary he seemed to have picked up another cast-off knapsack. This account along with several others place men in full green uniforms with some blouses, either issued for fatigue use in full to both regiments, or retained by some men from the previous year. Of course the ubiquitous red III Corps badge was not present; it was a blue one. This fact is overlooked quite often.

If only there was an authentic Yorktown, Chancellorsville, or Petersburg....us hardworking Sharpshooter types would have it made for once!

Brian White
Randoloph Mess, USSS &
Slackerz Saloon Mess, GHTI

[Marc]

Post edited for insertion of modern politics. JS Mod

As to the fatique blouse and the green frock...would not the USSS been issued the green frock and a fatique blouse much like other regular infantry units with blue frock and fatique blouse?

Of course in the beginning they were changing uniforms so fast from grey overcoat, the Whipple hat etc..I bet they even wondered what do I wear today.

[GreencoatCross]

Marc,

It appears that the men in both Sharpshooter regiments were issued a blouse or a frock, most commonly NOT together. In fact a lot of infantry regiments did not even practice carrying two different upper garments at a time. There is an order written by Lt. Col. Trepp after Gettysburg that stated the men in the 1st USSS had to carry both blouse AND coat (maybe Curt has this?), and the order appears to coincide with the late July 1863 issuances (shoot me your e-mail and I will send you an excellent article by my friend Bill Skillman) as well as an order around the same time that stated all men in the 1st Div. of the III Corps must draw a uniform coat or state-issue jacket (do away with hats as well, caps all the way, and also toss the boots!). Whether or not the order was even issued in earnest to the 1st Regt. men is unknown.

In addition, there exists an original USSS frock (unfortunately not well known and it looks it will stay that way...jealousy has done it's work in this case) which was worn by a 1st Regiment man upon his return to his company after recovery of wounds recieved at Second Bull Run. This frock was more than likely worn in early 1863, turned in on June 11th (the date they boxed their green coats and drew blouses) and never drawn again, or maybe it was sent home instead of being boxed. In any case, the war-time owner was wounded in the shoulder while crossing the Rappahanock during the intense firefight at Kelly's Ford in Nov. 1863 and the original frock shows no sign of a bullet hole. It's well-worn though and a lot of modifications have been done, it's clearly not the garment worn during the wounding; maybe another frock was worn, or even a blouse. We just don't know and probably never will.

Right now my mess practices a standard "blouses in late spring through mid fall, coats for everything else" when we go to "generic" events. If the event is scenario-specific, however, we scour original sources for the most appropriate thing to wear. In the case of an even coming up in July, we will br portraying Co. F 1st USSS at Gaines Mill in 1862. We're going with unlined blouses, blue pants, green caps, and absolutely nothing else but a shirt, socks, bootees, and gum blanket.

Brian White

[Yellowhammer]

Guys,

Let's keep this thread on the subject of uniforms and away from modern issues like NPS signage, the dearth of authentic sharpshooters, and reenacting politics within the USSS community. To bring this thread back on track, I deleted a few posts and pruned one or two others.

If you want to propose events or discuss the pros and cons of NPS interpretive programs, take it to The Sinks.

We now continue with previously scheduled programming...

[privstull]

Hello pards,

Does anyone know what the sharpshooters badges looked like in Lane's Brigade and if so the deminsions of them? My unit and I need to have badges similar to the original ones for an upcoming event but do not know what they look like. We have documentation that there were badges but nothing telling what they looked like, what they were made out of, and what the deminsions were. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

[Enfilade]

Ryan,

I'm always interested in documented items and especially those surrounding North Carolinians. Even moreso, those with Lane's Brigade. Can you please post that information you have documented?

Thanks in advance,

Mark Berrier
North State Rifles
combinations@northstate.net

[privstull]

It came out of a letter from a private in the 37th NC that one of my pards was able to look at awhile back. I do not have the entire letter copied but the one quote:

" As we waited our brigade sharpshooters were sent to the front, but were easliy seen for the badges which they wore."

This makes me believe that the badges were of a bright color of perhaps red but once more I have no other documentation. This is also the only time I have heard about the sharpshooters in Lane's brigade. I was just seeing if anyone else had by chance any other information. This is only the little information I have on the subject of badges and sharpshooters in Lane's brigade. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

[Masked Battery]

Ryan: Try "Lee's Sharpshooters, Or The Forefront Of Battle. A Story Of Southern Valor That Has Never Been Told" by William S. Dunlop. And...
"Brief Sketches Of The North Carolina State Troops In The War Between The States" by James Cook Birdsong. This has a section about Lane's Brigade Corps Of Sharpshooters.
The CS Army by early 1864 had learned that a detail of men from a brigade, detatched on a semi-permanent basis, could form a very effective skirmishing force. These men were exempt from fatigue duties, specially trained, and allowed to build unit cohesion. The old system of forming a force of skirmishers from a brigade entailed levying a few men from every company, most of whom didn't know each other, and throwing them together for a short while under officers they didn't know.
I've read that some of these Sharpshooter Corps had badges, so they wouldn't be meddled with by pesky officers. I also read (perhaps in Dunlop's book) that at least one of these Corps was issued "two-banded" Enfields, with bayonets, and that four or six men were given Whitworths.

Hope this helps. Neal

[privstull]

Neal,

I am much obliged with your response. I will go check out the sources you suggested. I believe that will help me solve my question. Godbless!

[JWolf]

Another source is Sharpshooters of the Civil War 1861-1865 by Philip Katcher

There is a bibliography at the end with about 12 sources, including the Dunlop book listed in one of the previous threads.

It describes sharpshooter badges as varying betweeen different commands but overall being fairly similiar. The theme seemed to be a red cross on one arm with the orientation as a "plus" instead of an "X".

Jim Wolf

[kemper_rifles]

There was an issue of "America's Civil War" a while back about ANV sharpshooter battalions. They mentioned sharpshooter badges for a certain brigade, may have been Lane's, as being red trefoils. As I recall, they had a picture too, but it was more of a pointy trefoil. You might try a search on an internet forum for "sharpshooter badges". Hope that helps.

[privstull]

I have looked into the books: "Brief Sketches of NC state troops in the war between the states" and "Sharpshooters of the Civil War 1861-1865" but have found no information about Lane's brigade sharpshooter badges.

"Lee's sharpshooters" and "The Forefront of Battle. A Story of SOuthern Valor that has never been told" were not at my library but I feel that the answer to my question may lie in one of those books. Does anyone know if there are any sources regarding how Lane's brigade shapshooter badges looked in these books, or any other sources you can think of? I would be much obliged if someone could help me out.

[Mike Hendricks]

Ryan,

Try Major Thomas Wooten or Wooten's Battalion Sharpshooter's. There is a brief war record posted on Robeson County, NC. Military Records about Major Thomas James Wooten. Thomas Wooten was the Major of the 18th. NCST and commanded the battalion of Sharpshooter's from Lane's Brigade. I have not found a description of Wooten's Battalion's Sharpshooter badge yet but hope to soon. From the information I have found every brigade in A.P Hill's III Corps had a sharpshooter battalion as early as the fall of 1863. The organization of the sharpshooter battalions where carried out by order of General Lee. I hope this helps.

Regards,
Mike Hendricks
Portsmouth National Grey's, IVR

[msmjr]

Say, here’s a little something I’ve often wondered about but have never mentioned...

From my vantage, why has there never been any reenacted use of the sights on our infantry weapons while firing in formation at folks far away? I’ve never even been encouraged to "up" the sight one notch when the bad guys have yet to get close. There have been lots of times I’ve marched upon a field and NEVER been told to do anything other than elevate and shoot.

Is it just me or is this just one of those things we've formally overlooked?

Respectfully,
-Mike Montgomery

[john duffer]

I'm guessing this is one of the major reason for the lack of hits in reenactor battles. :)

[MassVOL]

Say, here’s a little something I’ve often wondered about but have never mentioned...

From my vantage, why has there never been any reenacted use of the sights on our infantry weapons while firing in formation at folks far away? I’ve never even been encouraged to "up" the sight one notch when the bad guys have yet to get close. There have been lots of times I’ve marched upon a field and NEVER been told to do anything other than elevate and shoot.

Is it just me or is this just one of those things we've formally overlooked?

Respectfully,
-Mike Montgomery

There is a whole chapter on this subject in "The Crucible of Battle" by Brent Nosworthy, which I found very informative. I do not have it in front of me so I don’t want to get into to much detail because I don’t recall exact places and names.
Synopsis:
With the evolution of the rifled musket it was realized that some form of marksmanship training would be needed to effectively bring to bear the new range accuracy of the weapons at hand. Numerous studies were conducted in Europe, specifically Great Britain which founded a marksmanship school for this purpose.
It was slowly recognized in America while Jefferson Davis was the Secretary of War and steps were taken to implement a school in America to teach the fundamentals of marksmanship.

Thats about all I can say in certainty without referencing the book. Essentially Buchanan comes to office, the funding is cut while the diverging schools of thought fight over whether long range fire will even be utilized in the field and whether or not its worth spending the money on training no one will use or understand. I highly recommend that you check out the text of the book.

[PieBoy96]

When firing at will, I set the sight of my rifle for my own, personal touch of detail. I don't know if the guys around me notice or not, but really I do it for me. Allows me to also really take aim at the enemy (when at distance), thus making each round taking longer to fire, and then not burning up my freakin cartridge box in just one fight. I find it enjoyable to add this tiny touch, again for my own, personal experience.

But heck, you're right - I've never really heard any type of prompt like this, and have never even read an account of it.

[markj]

Greetings,

Hard to say. I've read letters and diary entries discussing target practice (both formal and informal) by troops in fixed or semi-permanent camps but not once have I ever seen anything mentioned about their using sights in battle. Perhaps some did but logic suggests that most troops didn't since:

1. Battlefield smoke and/or climatic conditions often rendered use of sights pretty much irrelevant.

2. There was presumably a concentration on quantity, rather than "quality," of fire. Throwing large amounts of lead in the general direction of the enemy ensured SOMETHING would get hit.

3. Flipped-up sights were likely a distraction, even downright pain-in-the-a**, especially when loading.

Most of the "targeting instructions" I've seen in contemporary documentation mainly consisted of "fire low" or "aim at their kneecaps." Folks who are into shooting sports and ballistics can undoubtedly say more about this subject, and correct me if I'm wrong, but the general impression I get is that troops had a recurring tendency to aim too high or rifles would "shoot high." This is why commanders advised their troops to aim low. Indeed, I found a letter in the "United States Army & Navy Journal" from an officer recommending that the standard firing commands be revised to state something to the effect of "Ready. Aim-LOW. FIRE."

Your thoughts?

Mark Jaeger

[DougCooper]

I think you got something there Duffer...now I get it!

Seriously, I cannot recall ever reading of an infantry commander at any level calling out ranges or site settings or anything of the sort. Have never read of ranges being marked off on defensive positions, other than trees being cleared to provide a field of fire. Instead you often read about waiting to fire at almost smoothbore ranges.

[Fod]

Mark framed the discussion properly - what does the historical record say about sight usage? Contemporary accounts? Memoirs?

There is a great memoir account of the battle of Pea Ridge in William Watson's "Life in the Confederate Army" where he describes his unit (3rd La) pushing fast through the terrain so they could keep the engagement range at under 100 yards. Even though the US troops laid down heavy fire, the CS troops did not suffer many casualties. After the fight, his men went back over the battlefield and saw many trees marked high up from bullets. They recovered enemy rifles and noticed they had "adjustable sights" set for 200 yards.

The Confederates appropriated the new rifles and knocked the sights off.

(I think that's the gist of the passage, if someone wants to put the exact text in, that would be good).

[Tom Ezell]

From my vantage, why has there never been any reenacted use of the sights on our infantry weapons while firing in formation at folks far away?

1. Because we aren't (or at least shouldn't be) using ball or other live ammunition where sight picture, steady hold factors, or any other marksmanship consideration comes into play. With rare exception, we're shooting blanks, and you don't have to hit 'em to get 'em.

2. Again, with rare exception, basic rifle marksmanship wasn't taught the way we do it now, or even a couple of decades later (presuming you've observed some of the British practice as depicted in Zulu).

3. Most small arms engagements during the Civil War fell within the range of what we now call "battlesight zero,", meaning that if you have a good aim on a man-sized target, you have a pretty good chance of landing a round somewhere on that target even without screwing with the sights.

Tom

[Rmhisteach]

Mike ,
I have been in this hobby since 1985. I have seen authenticity come a long way. I remember being told to shoot at an upward angle ( about 45 degs) in an effort to be safe. I really think that you are on the something. Perhaps reenactors like our nineteenth century counterparts feel that they need to be tactically behind the times and be unaware of the effective range and the need to revise tactics. just a thought.

[RelicRoomGuy]

Nosworthy's book is "must" reading here.

Basically, though - most firing WAS done at smoothbore ranges, and most firing that WOULD have been more effective with adjusted sights...did not recieve that benefit.

[billwatson]

If you want to have a lot of fun sometime have guys try to guess how far away something is, then measure it off and find out how many were even close. Part One of adjusting your sights is knowing how far away the target is, and that's where most of us don't even come close.

Range is critical to the effective use of the rifle musket, because of the ballistics -- low muzzle velocity, lots of arc in the trajectory, really makes where that bullet "falls" quite tricky. Between not using the sight and not knowing the range, it pretty much explains the reason why they all weren't dead within five minutes of opening fire on each other. They missed, a lot.

It's heresy, yup, but in my opinion a careful study of the patterns of hits taken in most battles would show that we tend to err on the high side when we are trying to do it right.

I believe you'll find both armies getting a little more serious about marksmanship in the winter of 1863-64. I know some fellows are getting quite excited about the research they are doing into Confederate sharpshooters in the ANV in early 1864, and maybe we'll see some of the results of that before too long.

[DougCooper]

My favorite quote on firing too high was from a Confederate Officer complaining about volleys going off into space and not hitting Yankees. He said something to the effect that "to have hit any enemy that day the Yankees would have had to have been located much closer to heaven than they are generally placed by our people...

At McDowell a smaller Union force going uphill inflicted almost twice the casualties on the CS troops as the latter fired so high (aiming downhill - a common problem) that many of the US troops had more to fear from falling branches than they did from lead. The US troops simply waited for Stonewall's boys to silouhette themselves against the sky while attempting to fire downhill. A disproportionate number of casualities (and the KIA to wounded ratio) were in the head and chest. See The Battle of McDowell by Armstrong and West Virginia's Civil War by Lang (I think that is the book name).

[Matt Woodburn]

Mike,

It may be that you've never fallen into a company that I've lead. Actually, I've listened to a number of good men over the years, John Crabb, Chad Green, and Ward Williams to name a few do this. For years, every event that had a battle, I'd watch the enemy close and instruct the sights to be set at the proper distance. I'd instruct the sergeants to walk the line and be sure this was done (it actually makes their job more interesting than just watching from the rank of file closers). As the enemy would close every 100 yards the sights would be reset. You are right that it is a not often enough done part of drill. Next time you're in a company drill, be sure the instructor teaches this to the rank and file instead of waiting until in a fight. This way the guys who've let their leaves stick with rust can get them cleaned before they're actually needed on the line for an accurate shot!

Best Regards,
Matt Woodburn


Say, here’s a little something I’ve often wondered about but have never mentioned...

From my vantage, why has there never been any reenacted use of the sights on our infantry weapons while firing in formation at folks far away? I’ve never even been encouraged to "up" the sight one notch when the bad guys have yet to get close. There have been lots of times I’ve marched upon a field and NEVER been told to do anything other than elevate and shoot.

Is it just me or is this just one of those things we've formally overlooked?

Respectfully,
-Mike Montgomery

[M.Latham]

Can someone then explain Cleburne's Division, and its record of success at "long" ranges? Perhaps it was that Cleburne trained in the basics of rifle marksmanship as a British corporal, and perhaps Major Benham's treatise on the subject for Bragg's army (printed in Richmond) and "perhaps" disseminated to both major Confederate field armies had something to do with the increase in casualties inflicted on Federal armies in 1864.

Just a thought.

Mark Latham

[Dan Hadley]

I've had the good fortune over the years, to fall in w/ a company or battalion now & then that has an officer or NCO w/ the presence of mind to remind the men to adjust their sights as the enemy appeared. Little things like that really help create a "moment". At a recent event, the men in the ranks were exhorted to be silent during the approach of the enemy, in order that our lieutenant could hear the bugle calls of the enemy, thus anticipating their next move. That was neat too.

I wish more fellows would try to stay in first person during a reenactment scenario- you see guys laughing and making all kinds of out of context commentary. It's bad enough trying to keep the proper frame of mind, with not being allowed to use a rammer, etc. Obviously the necessary safety rules must be followed. The downside of course is how it diminishes the authenticity of the moment.

Dan Hadley

[Enfilade]

Hello Mike! I came across this excerpt from "Lee's Tar Heels" by Earl J. Hess. When MacRae took over as Brigadier. He got it from the "MacRae Papers".

"Although only a temporary commander, MacRae organized a corps of sharpshooters for the brigade. This tactic was taken up by other brigade leaders as well. They realized that the task of skirmishing had become enormously important now that the opposing armies were constantly within striking distance of each other. The corps consisted of eighty men selected for their performance under fire. Each member wore a gold cross sewn onto his left sleeve, and names of each battle he fought were sewn onto his clothing. Charles Stedman later reported that the sharpshooters were armed with repeating rifles, but there is no evidence to support that claim. They were given special privileges to instill a strong sense of unit pride. Capt. Thomas Lilly of Company K, 26th North Carolina, was named commander of the corps. Lieutenants were drawn from eath of the other regiments in the brigade except the 44th North Carolina."

This happened right after Cold Harbor and during the Petersburg campaign.

Good to see you again on campaign this past weekend at Cold Harbor. And I hope this has helped in some way. :wink_smil

Mark Berrier
North State Rifles
combinations@northstate.net

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo Kameraden!

Interesting about aiming low or aiming at the knees...

If one were to aim at the knees of man at 200 yards with the 100 yard sight up (and not the 200), the shot will plough a furrow in the ground well short of the target.
And, I would point to the changes made in the U.S. M1855 rifles, and rifle-muskets- where the 800 yard "long range" rear sight was replaced in 1858 by the "short range" rear sight with 100, 300, and 500 yard leaves only.
What was man, trained or untrained, practiced or unpracticed, supposed to do at 50, 200, 400, or 600, etc. with a "Springfield?" ;-)
Or an officer who would have to determine a distance to give the order for rear sights to be set to...
I am reminded of the Berdan/Post Sharphooter training on assessing/determining ranges for targets- but would have to wonder if the 18th century "Napoleonic" linear warfare model of levelled firings into a receiving mass of shoulder-to-shoulder men was just not too entrenched until later in the War when tactics and trenches/breastworks/earthworks started to make things look more like WWI than Waterloo?

And, if a man jerks the weapon to shoot it instead of just squeezing the trigger, the tendency is to jerk the weapon up (and fire high).

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt
Shootist Mess

[Enfilade]

From my vantage, why has there never been any reenacted use of the sights on our infantry weapons while firing in formation at folks far away? I’ve never even been encouraged to "up" the sight one notch when the bad guys have yet to get close. There have been lots of times I’ve marched upon a field and NEVER been told to do anything other than elevate and shoot.

Is it just me or is this just one of those things we've formally overlooked?

Respectfully,
-Mike Montgomery[/QUOTE]


It might just be you Mike. :tounge_sm

We do this all the time and in fact, we did it at the Living History this past weekend at Cold Harbor during our demos. I distinctly heard my Lieutenant(Dave Hunter) bark out the order, "set your sights at 300 yards".

Mark Berrier
North State Rifles
combinations@northstate.net

[RJSamp]

Had the good fortune in my first major event, A140, to be in the same file as a Marine Corps Gunnery Sergeant. M-14 expert rifleman. During the battles he talked us through the firings.....teaching us how to breathe, where to position our sights, how to estimated distances, affects of wind, heat.....how to time the light squeezing of the trigger with both your heart beat and your breath....in short, how he had hunted for food for the family before the war..... So, at least on the left end of 1st Company, Black Hat Battalion, we were doing exactly what you are pointing out...

diary readings are filled with soldiers who couldn't fire.... and lots of talk about the few who could. The story of Barbee near the triangle stone fence firing some 40 shots from atop a rock.....near Devil's Den, 2nd July, 1st TX infantry......is a classic.

RJ Samp

[Robert Braun]

Greetings,

Hard to say. I've read letters and diary entries discussing target practice (both formal and informal) by troops in fixed or semi-permanent camps but not once have I ever seen anything mentioned about their using sights in battle. Perhaps some did but logic suggests that most troops didn't since:

1. Battlefield smoke and/or climatic conditions often rendered use of sights pretty much irrelevant.

2. There was presumably a concentration on quantity, rather than "quality," of fire. Throwing large amounts of lead in the general direction of the enemy ensured SOMETHING would get hit.

3. Flipped-up sights were likely a distraction, even downright pain-in-the-a**, especially when loading.

Most of the "targeting instructions" I've seen in contemporary documentation mainly consisted of "fire low" or "aim at their kneecaps." Folks who are into shooting sports and ballistics can undoubtedly say more about this subject, and correct me if I'm wrong, but the general impression I get is that troops had a recurring tendency to aim too high or rifles would "shoot high." This is why commanders advised their troops to aim low. Indeed, I found a letter in the "United States Army & Navy Journal" from an officer recommending that the standard firing commands be revised to state something to the effect of "Ready. Aim-LOW. FIRE."

Your thoughts?

Mark Jaeger

I have a journal account where a soldier in the Thirty-third Wisconsin specifically mentioned adjusting his sights before firing at a gray-clad opponant, perhaps located in either the Georgia Fort or the Salient Work covering the Hall's Ferry Road.

Bob.

[markj]

Greetings,

Please see the attached item (in Adobe pdf), for whatever it's worth....

Regards,

Mark Jaeger

[Johan Steele]

In "Soldier's Heart" a book on a young man w/ 1st MN describes the command given to set the sites to a particular range... he thought the range was too short but did as ordered. I believe he was referencing 2nd Manasas but don't recall. It's been quite a while since I read it, have to go get it from the library again.

I believe I've also read of something similar at Chickamauga w/ the 2nd MN.

I remember the mention of some Regulars wedging a slice of gutta percha under the short range leaf of their Springfields... apparently they had an annoying habit of flipping up at inopportune moments, wedging a bit of gutta percha underneath prevented this. They didn't expect to need to use any but the short range leaf.

Interesting topic.

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo Kameraden!

"I remember the mention of some Regulars wedging a slice of gutta percha under the short range leaf of their Springfields... apparently they had an annoying habit of flipping up at inopportune moments, wedging a bit of gutta percha underneath prevented this. They didn't expect to need to use any but the short range leaf."

I am not familiar with the reference, but yes:

The late M1855 and M1861 and M1863 ("Type I") two rear sight's leaves (the combined 100 and 300 yard, and the separate and longer 500 yard) fit flush with "steps" in the side wall of the sight base. They lift from front to rear to elevate.
Jamming or wedging something under the 100/300 leaf from the REAR of the sight will keep it (and the 500 yard leaf) from pivoting on the screw.

Interesting, as it sets the sight at 100 yards.

In the Modern World, one could do the same, or GENTLY squeeze the ears of the rear sight base a WEE BIT closer together with a vise.
Of the roughly 100 or so M1855's M1861's, M1863's I have handled, the rear sight leaves ranged from tight to floppy regardless of the condition of the gun- which would seem to relfect upon "fit and finish" as well as actual CW use or past 140 years of "Moderns" playing with them. (in loosening, or not loosening them up).

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt
Whose M1861 Leaves Flip Up In The 105th OVI Imamge Mess

[Rifleman]

Being a competitive shooter and "Dog of War" this is a subject that has held my curiosity for some time. My feeling is that troops in the Civil War war were better trained in marksmanship than many today would expect, what they did lack was training in killing...being conditioned to kill.

After WWII it was found that only about 10% of the rifleman in the ETO who were surveyed anonymously reported killing, 20% firing at least 1 shot with the "intent" to kill, with conditioning those numbers have continued to rise in each conflict since.

When I look at the last year of the Civil War I see men's hearts harden and they go from shooting at the enemy to aiming at the enemy. I don't think they were "highly" trained marksman but I do think that for the most part when the musket went boom most hoped nobody really got hurt....not such a bad thing really!

[markj]

Hi,

Opinions about the quality of American marksmanship during the war, not surprisingly, varied. In any event, the level of "marksmanship practice" in the Federal or Confederate armies was generally not comparable to what was conducted in Europe (most notably Prussia which, as I recall, required troops to fire at least 50 rounds in formal target practice per annum).

Nevertheless, as I stated, opinions varied. The following item extracted from the 29 August 1863 "United States Army and Navy Journal" may be of some interest.

WASTE OF AMMUNITION.‎

The following is extracted from a recently published book of campaign sketches in ‎Virginia and Maryland, by Captain GEORGE F. NOYES:‎

‎[Note: Actual title of the work is: Noyes, George F. (1824-1868). The Bivouac and the ‎Battlefield, or, Campaign sketches in Virginia and Maryland. New York: Harper & Bros, ‎‎1863. xi, 13-339p. This is available in microform.]‎

The great disproportion in our battles between the number of ball cartridges discharged ‎and the number of killed and wounded was due mainly to the want of presence of mind in our ‎raw troops; but the very limited investigation I have been enabled to make has convinced me that ‎our troops take much better aim, and consequently waste far less ammunition than is usual in ‎European warfare.‎
During the wars of the French Revolution and of the Empire—NAPOLEON’S wars—‎according to GASSENDI, a French general of artillery, the infantry fired 3000 cartridges for ‎every enemy killed or wounded. PIOBERT admits the same thing. DECKER, a Prussian ‎general, and one of the best military writers in German, estimates that not less than 10,000 ‎cartridges are burned for every enemy killed or wounded.‎
At the battle of Vittoria the British are supposed to have killed or wounded one of the ‎enemy for every 800 balls fired. An English officer states that at the battle of Cherubusco the ‎Mexicans killed or wounded an American for every 800 balls fired, and that the Americans killed ‎or wounded a Mexican for every 125 balls fired.‎
The heroic ROSECRANS, in his account of the bloodily contested battle of ‎Murfreesboro, declares, “ Of 14,560 rebels struck by our missiles, it is estimated that 20,000 ‎rounds of artillery hit 728 men, and 200,000 rounds of musketry hit 13,833 men, averaging 27 ‎cannon shots to hit one man, and 145 musket shots to hit one man.‎
In the battle of Gainesville there could not have been expended more than 100,000 ‎cartridges, and the enemy admit[s] a loss of more than 1000 men, thus averaging 100 musket ‎shots to each of the rebel killed or wounded. Of course all such statements only approximate the ‎actual ratio, but it is sufficiently clear that great as is the waste of ammunition by our army, it is ‎not only equalled, but excelled by those [armies] of Europe.‎
One trouble is that our men going into battle, are weighed down, overloaded with ‎ammunition, having to stuff their pockets as well as their cartridge-boxes with the sixty or eighty ‎rounds ordered. Of course very much of this is thrown away and wasted; but this is only a ‎trifling evil compared with the encouragement thus given to the too prevalent idea among the ‎men that he who fires the greatest number of rounds in battle is the best soldier. I have heard ‎men boasting of their achievements in this regard, and the result of such an idea is a hurried ‎loading and discharge without any regard to aim; a wasting upon trees and foliage of ammunition ‎which, if used at all, should be used so as to defeat the enemy. I was struck with a remark ‎made by a rebel prisoner to his captors, “We never carry more than forty rounds into ‎action, and usually expend about ten.‎
‎“There is altogether too much of this wild, reckless firing, the men discharging their ‎pieces before bringing them fairly down to a level, and utterly regardless of taking aim. Of ‎course, there are periods when heavy, rapid, and continuous volleys are necessary; still it would ‎be well if every man could be drilled as a sharpshooter, taught to shoot slowly, and always take ‎aim, either at the enemy or his supposed locality.‎
‎“In the five battles of the late Italian campaign, it was estimated that about 8 per cent of ‎the French and Sardinians, and 10 ½ per cent of their enemies, the Austrians, were either killed ‎or wounded. In the battles spoken of in these sketches our loss was not far from 10 per cent of ‎the whole numbers engaged, while certain divisions and brigades lost one-third their number; ‎and in the fearfully bloody fight at Gainesville two of our regiments lost more than one-third of ‎their number engaged, as also did the 4th brigade
‎“The proportion between the killed and wounded is about as 1 to 5, and of the wounded ‎about 1 in 10 never recovers. If this be even approximative to the truth, it certainly robs war of ‎some of its presumed fatality. As I have before remarked, the escape of so large a majority of ‎the men, amid such storms of bullets sweeping and yelling around their ears, has always been ‎the great mystery of war.”‎

Regards,

Mark Jaeger

[MassVOL]

Mark thanks for the great post

[markj]

Mark thanks for the great post

Hi Thomas,

Glad you enjoyed it. I can probably dig up more if need be. It may be of interest to you that Wm. Conant Church, the editor of the "Army and Navy Journal," eventually helped found the National Rifle Association in 1871 based, in large part, on his wartime observations about the poor quality of military marksmanship. Another prominent founding member of the NRA, and its third president, was Brevet Major General Alexander Shaler who served in the 7th NYSM, 65th New York, a variety of other high-profile assignments during the war, as well as commanded the post-war 1st Division of the National Guard, State of New York (NGSNY).

Regards,

Mark Jaeger

[rebyank]

When it comes to sighting for me, I just pass the whole hornets nest and use my smoothy that doesn't have a rear sight.

[hardeeflag]

Hello pards,

Does anyone know what the sharpshooters badges looked like in Lane's Brigade and if so the deminsions of them? My unit and I need to have badges similar to the original ones for an upcoming event but do not know what they look like. We have documentation that there were badges but nothing telling what they looked like, what they were made out of, and what the deminsions were. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

I have not seen any physical evidence of the badges worn by Maj. Wooten's corps of sharpshooters. I have several post war articles written by Lane. I also have some AARs written by Maj. Wooten. They were located in the Lane papers, but nothing regarding their badges. He retired to Camden, SC prior to his death.

There is one example worn by Sgt. Wise of the 2nd Maryland Inf. It is I belive located in the Maryland Hostorical Society. It is of an orange or red color Quadrafoil with pointed ends and looks to be made of felt. As noted in one of the other posts, there is a letter reference by Gen. MacRae in his brother's papers at Duke University. They evedently wore gold color crosses on their sleeve as well as stitched the names of the battles they were in on their jackets. Another reference to Gregg's SC brigade was a diagonal red slash on their sleeve. My opinion is that corps of sharpshooter's badge design would be developed on the brigade level and could vary.

I have a copy of Maj. Eugene Blackford's (comdg. Rode's Brigade Sharpshooters) diary and have not come across anything regarding badges, although some very interesting uses of the bugle.

Interestingly enough the painting by Winslow Homer, Prisoners from the Front, has a young officer on there with a black cross on his sleeve. I am of the opinion this offcer is a representation of a member of a brigade corps of sharpshooters. Winslow Homer seemed to have some degree of facination with sharpshooters during the Civil War. I hope you find this helpful, but in regard to the design of Lane's Corps of Sharpshooters badges your guess is as good as mine. In my opinion if I were you I would design a badge based on all physical evidence of other brigades and come up with your own design to represent Lane's Brigade sharpshooters. What your trying to do is represent the corps of sharpshooters, so some sort of badge would serve to represent that corps' badge and can serve as a great living history conversational piece to the public.

Rich Saathoff
hardeeflag@yahoo.com

[markj]

Here's another item to throw into the mix. I found this just the other day while reviewing the microfilmed diary of Adjutant (1st Lt) Hugh Gallagher, 35th (1st Irish) Indiana Volunteer Infantry at the Indiana Historical Society (IHS Microfilm F91):

April 7 1864 Monday

Agreeable to orders, as the day progressed, had target practice outside of the picket lines. The boys made good shooting for the first effort.
I tried a shot and hit the mark at 150 yds. Drawed [sic] 12,000 rounds EB [Elongated Ball] Cartridges for concentrations of the practice. The weather is warm with indications of rain.

[end quote]

I have no immediate idea from what level the "orders" for target practice descended but organized target practice was certainly being done at the regimental level just prior to the Atlanta Campaign. I don't have the precise strength reports for the 35th IVI in April 1864 but I'd guess the effective numbers were around 500. If this was the case, then each "rifle" was issued about 30 rounds or so strictly for such activities.

Regards,

Mark Jaeger

[buckandball]

Kind of a hashed out thread, but a few things seem to be of interest for arguments consideration regarding the military cultural psyche of the era.

For the era, it might be observed that it was more important for gentleman on the field to be disciplined in drill and maneuver. If they stayed together, smartly obeyed orders, maneuvered tightly on the field, this might have had a greater effect than accurate fire (when paired against an equally poorly shooting foe). Drill Drill Drill... If one can exploit poor formations, even with marginal fire, it may out weigh the most accurate fire from a marginally drilled body of troops.

The notion of intensive marksmanship fire was new. Very new. Considering the recent advent of mass-produced rifled-muskets, etc. Somewhere in this post someone mentioned a former Marine in their ranks who likes to talk them through the steps of firing. This is interesting. Being a Marine myself, I admit that every time a squeeze a trigger, through second nature I think, "sight alignment, breath, relax, aim, squeeze...” It works very well with an M16 or an M'61 (if you'll pardon the word play). But, it seems counter to the era. For those few times I make an event, I make a mental effort to simply look down the barrel, think, "I hope I hit him" and squeeze the trigger. It would have been a significantly great minority of troops in the era who would be thinking "ok, judge the wind from the heat mirage, I better aim to the left to accommodate this stiff cross wind I can see by the smoke drifting...” That gives great credit to assume the average volunteer understood heat mirage. It just seems evident that the average guy would be thinking as he looks down the barrel "I hope I hit him before he hits me" BANG. This transcends time. Even today, on the rifle range, with no one shooting back, there is always some jack ass who goes from the 200 yard line to the 300 yard line, shoots a string of fire, wonders why he shot so low, and then gets chewed out by his range coach because he didn't remember to raise his rear sight to 300 yards...

Anyway, just something to think about.

[BobSullivanPress]

I'd like to throw in a few observations here. Some come from a book which I believe is one of the great references but its cartoon-like drawings turn some people off, and fool others into thinking that there's no good information in it. The book is called Arms and Ammunition of the Civil War, by Jack Coggins. Check it out some time.

Anyway, a couple of points.

1. Target practice was given at least lip service during the Civil War. Because The Manual of Target Practice was one of 5 books issued to every commissioned officer. Kautz's The Company Clerk confirms this. By the way, the other 4 were Tactics, Regulations, Bayonet Drill, and Outpost Duty.

The Target Practice manual contains plans and sketches for setting up ranges to practice marksmanship.

2. Every regiment had a stadia, a device for estimating range. According to the manual, I believe the first sergeant carried it.

3. The manual states that a silver stadia was to be given to the best shot in the regiment, and that this device was to be worn on the coat at dress parades. (Note: I've seen some of these devices, so I know they existed.)

4. Basic Civil War tactics demonstrated knowledge of range estimating and considerations of ballistics. Coggins states that the weapons of the time fired a heavy projectile at a relatively slow muzzle velocity. This means that the drop of the projectile occurred relatively rapidly, especially when compared with modern weapons. Basically speaking, and to repeat what Curt said earlier, if you sighted your weapon at 100 yards at a man who was actually 300 yards away, your shot would hit the ground. And if you sighted your musket properly at a man who was 300 yards away, your shot would actually go over the head of a man 100 yards away. So wherever possible, the distance between the first line of men and the second was set on purpose to nullify the effects of inaccurate distance estimation by Civil War soldiers. A smart officer spaced his lines so that a properly aimed shot at the first line, if it missed its target, would hit the ground before it got to the second line. (Note: one of the tragedies of the 3rd day at Gettysburg was that the reserve line of the Union army took horrific casualties because it was placed on the back side of the ridge, and the slope of the ridge perfectly compensated for the over-shooting of the Confederate artillery. Had the ground been level, the missed shots would have hit the ground before hitting the second line.)

I believe that the commanders and the men knew what they were doing, and that practice was held where practical. Again, it's one of those things that in the beginning of the war, when a few days of sharp battle was followed by weeks of re-fitting, time was available for items like this. As the war progressed to daily combat and skirmishing, and the armies never backed away from each other, these things had a lower preference.

[buckandball]

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying they didn't know what they were doing at all. I'm just trying to find a general period norm for the common soldier verses one extremem or the other (not everyone just closed their eyes and squeezed the trigger, nor did they all have the capaity of training or coolness under fire to calmly judge distance, wind, elevation, etc.).

This is a redundant post from another thread here, but this is a very interesting article regarding the English training on the Enfield.

http://www.researchpress.co.uk/targets/pickets.htm

Does it apply to boys from Georiga or Indiana? Nope. But it at least gives some insight to state of thinking of the day. But these are British Regulars I imagine. I'd like to find a reference articel like this written about the US Regulars. One must exist in some archive...

[MuleyGil]

I'm sure that a lot of us knew this fact at one time, but may have forgotten: The National Rifle Assoication was formed by former Union Army officers because they observed very poor marksmanship during the War and they wanted to encourage rifle training.

[P.Brown]

Heres my tow cents,

At Cedar creek this past october I fell in with the sharpshooters. At the event, before actually being engaged we were laid down by our captain to wait for the command to go in. At this time my captain pulled out a brass range finder. He found the range and ordered the company to adjust our sights accordingly. This really added something to the event for me. I like many others here had never thought of it. I recommend this anytime the scenario deems fit.

-Philip Brown

[pipthelimey]

Gents,
While reading on the technicalities of aiming and rounds expended per casualty, I think one important perspective is being overlooked. Thad Dolzall hit on it a little bit, but there has been some interesting research on how the psychological impact of killing affects casualty rates. A gentleman named Lt. Col. Grossman has a book out called "On Killing." I would highly reccomend it to everyone in this hobby. The 1st of three sections in the book deals with military matters, and how over the years, the military has changed its training from pure marksmanship to the modern army "pop up" course. He submits that this change occured because it changes the shooting action to an instinctual, rather then conscious reaction. He's got lots of historical data to support his conclusions, and I wish I had the book in front of me to quote, but he shows through several different wars how only a small percentage of men were involved in the actual killing through small arms fire. He uses hundreds of personal accounts of men who weren't cowards, but often found the mental anguish of taking life to be insurmountable. He's got some interesting thoughts on crew-served weapons, (cannons in our case), proximity and how it relates, and "posturing." I'd reccomend it to everyone.

[nrandolph]

As far as being asked to use sights for an event, I'm pretty sure that at Payne's Farm my company was told to adjust sights for a particular range. I can't remember exactly what the range was.....perhaps 250 yards or so, that kinda sticks in my mind. Maybe the commanders that were there or some of the other rank and file can recall that order. Point being though, I've only ever been ordered to do that but that single time in seven years of reenacting.

Neil Randolph
1st WV

[Son of Eire]

Use a smoothbore and you won't need to bother!

[ooticamitica]

I personally do and i do change my elevation when they are far enough away, I also have never heard any command to do so.
-Tim Harrold

[wmkane]

The discussion of the stadia by John Sullivan has intruiged me. I have done some prelimenary searches that have come up blank. So I ask: Does anyone know of a source for stadia (either originals or reproductions?)

Many Thanks

[pipthelimey]

I am not sure if there were stadia's in use with the artillery, although I know a form of the stadia is used by engineers. I am sure that ranges for fixed guns were often determined pre-bombardment using an engineer's stadia. I doubt if any type of stadia was used by foot troops, with the slightest possible exception of some sharpshooters. My personal experience with them is a wooden stick which I have premeasured marks on. I hold it upright at arm's length, and there are etches where I have used pre-measured ranges to mark where a man's head would be if I aligned his feet with the mark at the bottom of the stick. I don't use it much for reenacting, (in fact only once) but I use it for shooting live at distance. It's really for approximation more then anything. Here are two good links which discuss the principles behind it:
http://www.du.edu/~jcalvert/astro/stadia.htm

http://pasture.ecn.purdue.edu/~agen215/stadia.html

In the field, the most practical tool I have used is the following measurements. I'm not sure of the source.

2000 yards: infantry will appear as a black line
1200-1500 yards: ranks of infantry can be distinguished
1000 yards: The lines of heads and legs are visible
800 yards:The upper outline of men can be distinguished
600 yards: men are distinctly visible, but color can not be determined. Head dress can be recognized
400 yards: The ornaments on headdress can be seen, and colors are distinguishable
200 yards: mens heads are visible
100 yards: The line of the men's eyes are visible
80 yards: Men's eyes are distinct
25 yards: The whtes of the eyes are visible

The document I copied this from didn't have units of measurement. It may be feet, so any old grunts out there can probably give me an idea.

Andrew Jerram

[Tom Ezell]

Now that somebody's dredged this up again, and having on my part joined up with a muzzleloader club that takes its marksmanship seriously, are you using full sight, half sight, or fine sight? There's a big difference, even when using adjustable rear sights.

MAJ Calhoun Benham's little manual A System for Musketry Instruction, implemented in Cleburne's Division during the winter of 1862-1863 is a valuable little handbook on the care and use of a black powder rifle, and sets out a good model for teaching marksmanship and the estimation of distances/range. They didn't get the live fire practice recommended in the book, but they mastered sighting and position drills, and spent hours judging the distance to a man sized target at different ranges.

And for you smoothbored smart@sses, use of the sights does too make a difference when you're trying to hit a man at battlesight distance, whether with round ball or buck and ball, rather than spray 'n pray, use the tang screw as your rear mark and line up the axis of the bore on your target... just like you would with a modern shotgun. You'll come a lot closer to getting your man rather than spraying to the left or right of him because your bore isn't in line.

[Longbranch 1]

A very good question.

Not to dwell , and I look forward to researching this.

Personally, I believe the elevation sights were rarely used, and even more rarely ordered to use.

Pretty much throughout the chain of command in the armies of either side ( with the exception of Artillery), we were still fighting a Napoleonic type war.

This was the last " chivalrous " war.
Technology of the demise of your foe was increased more than at any other time .Between the invention of the bow and arrow and the invention of the atomic bomb.
More advancements in more areas.

All of these are optimaly designed , yes, to kill your opponent, but more importantly to make him submit to your will.

The technological revolution in weaponry 1850? was not accompanied by a comensurate advancement in tactics.

Just a thought,
Kevin Ellis,
26th NCT

[Fahlem]

Every time my pads & I are out on the skirmish line, I always remember to flip up the rear sight & most of the other guys follow suit. We even go to the extent of estimating ranges and thus shout out the distance in yards or sometimes rods to each other. I will agree however, that the "little touches" are often over looked in the hobby. I wish more reenactors paid closer attention to what "real" effective fire would do & react properly rather than the unfortunate close quarter powder burner that most reenactments generally degrade into. It really does the hobby a disservice.

Michael Fahle
Co. F 2nd USSS

[Gary of CA]

Actually, the British School of Musketry at the Hythe was patterned after the French model.

[Bill]

In early 1860, the War Department conducted a series of accuracy tests on basically every weapon they had in their inventory, to include rifles, rifle muskets, altered muskets, and smooth bores. They had a ten man squad fire in volley, by file, and as skirmishers. The also had marksmen firing off-hand and from a rest. The target was ten feet square with a horizontal and vertical line through the center as an aiming point. Using the rifle musket, the results were pretty amazing. As an example, Firing as skirmishers, the squad fired fifty shots and twenty-one hit the target at 500 yards. At 100 yards every shot hit the target. Interestingly enough, it took five minutes for 10 men to fire those fifty shots! Drawing of the actual targets were included in the report. It looks like one man was shooting low and to the left!

IMHO, there was one major flaw in these tests. All shooting was done at measured distances that exactly matched the rifle sights; 100, 200, 300, and 500 yards. My M-1855 is actually sighted out to 800 yards. My guess is that accuracy would have declined quite a bit, if the soldiers had to guess various ranges.

In regard to the smooth bores. Very interesting. At 200 yards, many of the buck shot fired at that range failed to penetrate the target. Firing was stopped at that distance. The Board concluded that it was a waste of time and ammunition to shoot buck and ball at 200 yards, since even if you were lucky enough to hit someone, it probably wouldn't hurt them much!

This entire report was reprinted in Claud Fuller's book, "The Rifled Musket", that was published in, I believe, 1968. I paid $4.95 for the book. It costs a little more today!

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Sights and Mark Jaeger's comments:
We recently worked together on translating from German to English the M-1854 Lorenz Manual called Osterrichische Infanterie - Feurgewehr, Wien, 1857 From what I can recall, the majority (80%) of "Austrian rifles" had the block type rear sight, set for 300 schritt (about 250 yards). The manual said to aim at the knees at 100 schritt, and then to elevate to the mid-section at another distance, and so on. I don't have the rough draft in front of me, but it does go along with what we see posted here on use of sights from other sources. Finally, since the Austrian Lorenz manual was intended only for officers, there was a comment in there about the predominant use of block sights since "soldiers are not smart enough to be good shots" or that was the thrust of the translation.

This is a bit off the subject of sights, but it seemed to me that one possible reason for the shooting accuracy complaints with the M-1854 was not the sights, but that the Ordnance department(s) made no effort to secure the correct size ammunition (13.9 mm or .556) for it. Additionally, Mark Jaeger's recent effort was the first attempt to translate Osterrichische Infanterie - Feurgewehr, Wien, 1857 from German to English. Meaning (ironically) neither side had an English translation of the "owners manual" for the M-1854 Lorenz during the Civil War.

Lastly, the title of the Brent Nosworthy book is "The Bloody Crucible of Courage: Fighting Methods and Combat Experience of the Civil War " (Published by Carroll-Graf, New York 2003; 752 pages). I have the citation practically memorized from referencing it so often...strongly recommended.

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo!

I owed someone a reference to the uniforms of the Ohio Indpendent Companies of Sharpshooters, but his e-mail dropped off my "saved file" and was lost.

U]History of Cuyahoga County Ohio [/U] Crisfield Johnson, 1879.

"On the companies being completed, the Fifth, Sixth and Seventh were organized in a battalion, and Capt. Barber, as the senior officer, was placed in command. The men were all picked with reference to their physical ability, and before being mustered each was required to make a "string" of not exceeding twenty-five inches in five shots, at one hundred yards off-hand or at two hundred yards at a rest. Their uniform was the same as that of the infantry, except that the trimmings were green, and they were armed with Spencer's seven-shooting rifles.

( I am sorry for the delay. My pard who had the book, was diagnosed with prostate cancer after some major bleeding problems, and was side-tracked for a spell.)

Curt
Company "C"
7th Ohio Independent Company of Sharpshooters

[GreencoatCross]

Curt, that's a great reference! I've seen similar uniform descriptions coming out of Illinois but never Ohio.

This reminds me, I'm not sure if you've seen it yet, but there is a blue Federal frock with rubber eagle buttons and green trim down in the Atlanta History Center. On display with the frock is a blue forage cap with rubber buttons. I am unsure of the provenance but from photos of the frock it looks like the green trim was not original to the coat.

Brian White
Wambaugh, White, & Co.

[Dan Munson]

Bill Rodman's recitation, above, about the 1860 weapons test contains another piece of data that would impact the accuracy results. Bill states: "As an example, Firing as skirmishers, the squad fired fifty shots and twenty-one hit the target at 500 yards. At 100 yards every shot hit the target. Interestingly enough, it took five minutes for 10 men to fire those fifty shots!" As I read this, it sounds like a firing rate of 1 shot per man per minute. Pretty darned deliberate -- much more so than would have occurred on a battlefield (well, until the bores got fouled, anyway).

Dan Munson

[BobbyHughes]

Kurt,

I was the feller that you were talking to about the OICSS, and I thank you for getting back to me on that!

The guys in my unit took a looooong look on doing Birge's, and decided against it, but I really thank you for the info... thats what I love about A/C, everyone so helpfull and willing to share knowledge!

YOS
Bobby Hughes

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo!

Bobby lad!

You are welcome, and sorry for the delay.

Back to guarding General Sherman impressions. ;)

Curt

[RJSamp]

Am reading Gettysburg stuff (again, it's always fun to see coffee smears on a page that you read 10+ years ago). Every couple of years I ask the same question on different forums. Buford on July 1st 1863 makes the comment that they'll be coming (a-booming) in their usual style....with 3 lines of skirmishers (it's a line in the GBurg movie as well). Then the modern authors quote each other about the CSA advancing in the 'usual' style with 3 lines of skirmishers....or in the 'orthodox' style. In "Witness to Gettysburg" they have two 'modern' references and then one to the OR. This was for HETH's advance......Davis's Miss. NC Brigade. If I keep reading you can find similar references to the skirmishers preceeding the Pickett/Pettigrew/Trimble Assault.

Temper this with the recent reading of "Shock Troops of the Confederacy"....where mile long sharpshooter battalion lines and references to a single line controlled by the bugle are rampant.....along with groups/4's/clusters/firing by 4+ rifles simultaneously at a single target abound. i.e. NOT 3 lines, NOT a cloud. So Blackfords deployment on July 1st between Oak Hill and Gordon's Brigade along Steven's run was a single line.

NOTE: I think the observers are astute enough to recognize a mile long line at 5+ pace intervals from a line of platoon or company skirmish line reserves at x00 yard intervals...and they note the advance coming in Columns (of companies most likely) and then deploying into long double ranked lines.

1. What was the ANV practice....what manual /writings sheds light on 3 lines of skirmishers being the 'usual' style? Only in the ANV ??

2. clouds of skirmishers?

3. single line of skirmishers seems to be the usual practice for USA (including Berdan's) and CSA Sharpshooter battalions.

Anyone experimented with this....tried to reenact it? This wasn't done at A135 unfortunately, but then again skirmishing is the lost tactical art of ACW combat.....

Thanks!

[Jubilo]

Dear Enfant Terrible ,
Brilliant post as usual . Later Napoleonic period tactics all involve swarms of skirmishers. Didn't Sharpe single handedly defeat Boney ?
The best use of skirmishers in my personal experience was at the Monocacy event which was filmed for the "NO Retreat from Destiny ," film .
The clouds of skirmishers , theory always made me wonder why the skirmishers didn't knock down the fences or bring engineer troops with them to do so previous to Pickett's Charge.
Most for the accounts of Sherman's troops in the Atlanta campaign mention "Indian " fighting " skirmishing , which I would assume is single line.
Once this issue is addressed we can proceed to how cavalry both mounted and dismounted were used and how mounted infantry manuevered and were armed.
all for the old flag,
David Corbett

[hiplainsyank]

Is this the missing link between this thread and the Emory Upton 1866/7 tactics discussion?

Just curious.

[RJSamp]

Is this the missing link between this thread and the Emory Upton 1866/7 tactics discussion?

Just curious.

Well I posted 3 lines of skirmishers as a new thread on Sunday. Just posted on Upton today. Two different topics to me.... Upton's tactical innovation is 4's.....you feed men, cavalry, cannon into the battle by 4's. Need 100 rifles on the line, you feed in the first 25 4's into the line.

[Gary of CA]

I've read another account where the Confederate sharpshooters preceded all others. They advanced and the terrain dictated how they moved. It was basically from cover to cover with less attention to distance between themselves than a skirmisher would. They were supported by their skirmish line paid more attention to the distance between themselves. The skirmishers followed the sharpshooters at a distance. Finally, the line of battle brought up the rear.

In another account, I read that the Confederate sharpshooters fell back once the lines of battle became engaged. The skirmishers then became the provost who kept others from skedaddling.

[amontalvo915]

I was looking on ebay and found this, has anybody else ever seen this?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=200159282472&ssPageName=ADME:B:WNA:US:72&isfrommerc=1&refitem=170154508818&itemcount=8&refwidgetloc=watch_reminder_email&refwidgettype=osi_widget&refitem=170154508818&itemcount=4&refwidgetloc=watch_reminder_email&refwidgettype=osi_widget&isfrommerc=1

Ashley Montalvo

[BrianHicks]

Nope... that's a new one for me. (Not that I would know anything about Snipers or Sniping or anything.... ;) )

Optical Sniper Scopes were in use during the Civil War (albeit in a limited capacity).

I'd like to see some source documentation placing that e-bay item in use during our period of interest.

[Gary of CA]

More likely a used modern repro. There's a thread around here somewhere and Henrich pointed out that fancy sights could be stored in the patchbox of the 1855 Springfield.

BTW, not all sharpshooters used "telescope" equipped guns and some used globe sights.

[BrianHicks]

More likely a used modern repro. There's a thread around here somewhere and Henrich pointed out that fancy sights could be stored in the patchbox of the 1855 Springfield.

BTW, not all sharpshooters used "telescope" equipped guns and some used globe sights.\

I am aware that there were a few varieties of mechanical sights (vice optical) but I also understand that they were the exception, vice the norm.

I'd still like to see the period documentation on the item presented above.

[Gary of CA]

From Comrade Curt Heinrich-Schmidt:


It wasn't an experiment, but standard issue from 1857-1859.

The early versions of the U.S. Model 1855 Rifle had a patchbox that was mortised for the figure eight shaped or double ring shaped crosshair front sight that was secured to the front sight with a set screw.
If one examines original M1855 Rifles, all of the three early versions that have a long mose cap have implement boxes that are milled for the crosshair sight. It was deleted in 1859.

Most standard references c arry this info, such as Robert Riley's UNITED STATES MILITARY SMALL ARMS 1816-1865 or Paul Davies monograph on the M1855 Rifle from 1983.
There used to be an 1855 RM and R collector that set up a display of every type of M1855 at the Ashland, Ohio Civil War Gun Show for many years.

Curt


Mind you, I never did get a copy of Robert Riley's book so I haven't confirmed it.

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo!

Correct.

It appears to be the "so-so" reproduction of the U.S. M1855 Rifle "long range" so-called "Figure Eight Front Sight."

The first in the series of the new U.S. Model 1855 Rifle, made in 1857 and 1858, was brass mounted and browned barrelled, with a "long" nosecap. All stocks made for the long nosecap had the "implement" or "patchbox" mortise milled to take the "figure eight" front sight.
Later in 1858, the long range ("roller coaster") rear sight was replaced with the "short range" rear sight.
Starting in 1859 the M1855 Rifle was further changed over to iron furniture, the short range rear sight, but still with the long brass nosecap.
Later in 1859, they again made changes, goingn with the short brass nosecap- and eliminating both the "figure eight" front sight and its mortise in the implement box. The brass nosecaps werwe replaced later in 1859 with iron ones.

At any rate, it is not a "sniper" thing in either name or function.

I used to have one for my brass mounted, first M1855 Rifle variety (it looked nice in a fully stocked "patchbox") , but sold the Rifle years ago. I suspect since the barrels of the "Springfield" and "Enfield" are thicker than the original rifle-muskets, and closer to the rifles.... that the M1855 "Figure Eight" front sight MIGHT would fit a repro Springfield or Enfield if one can get passed the historical chasm, er question, of "Why??"

Dixie Gun Works still lists them for sale as a "Remington Zouave Sniper Sight." And suitable for the M1841 Mississippi Rifle.
Sigh...

Herr Gary... Dare I say it? Robert Reilly is partially wrong in his M1855 Rifle commentary. He says (page 38) that the iron -mounted versions of the M1855 Rifle are without the Figure 8 front sight. That is true, except for the first of the limited production run iron-mounted versions that still retained the long brass nosecap- and the "Figure 8" front sight.
On the other hand, it is true the last of the variations, post late 1859, that were all iron-mounted, did not.

Curt

[amontalvo915]

So this would probably be nice to pick up if you have an 1855 Springfield?

[Gary of CA]

If you want it and bid, don't bid more than what Dixie Gun Works sells them for (including postage).

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo!

"So this would probably be nice to pick up if you have an 1855 Springfield?"

No.

They were used for the first four out of five M1855 RIFLE variations- from the first in 1857 through 1859.
They would NOT be appropriate for any of the M1855 Rifle-Muskets.

I may be Out of the Loop, but I do not recall any Italian repro M1855 Rifles being made...

Curt

[amontalvo915]

I know someone with an original 1855, I was thinking about buying it, and was searching for a sling and this popped up.

[Duff]

Just a fact to throw in,

The term "sniper" was not used until circa 1900 by the British. It was a term for the scouts/marksmen the British had in south Africa. It was not used outside of that area until WWI.

[Gary of CA]

Sniper actually goes back to the 18th Century. However, when it crept into the American venacular is debatable and for the Civil War, I've only found it used several times and those are suspect. In those cases, the memoirs were penned after the Boer War and WW I popularized the word. David Holt's memoir (Ballard, Michael & Cockrell, Thomas, eds. A Mississippi Rebel in the Army of Northern Virginia. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1995) is a good example of a post 19th Century usage. Overall I would agree with Duff to stay away from "sniper" in reference to a Civil War era sharpshooter-even if he using a telescope rifle.

[Duff]

Interesting. The History Channel was wrong!

Sharpshooter was much more common. I have heard marksmen used as well.

[BobbyHughes]

Comrades,

Tried the search, but to no avail, so here goes

Does anyone do a repop of the English Davidson scope used on some Whitworth rifles? I saw what looked like one on the PAG/Lee's Sharpshooters sight and was wondering if it was a repop scope that was mounted like the Davidson or if it was a copy of the later, or perhaps an original scope

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo!

It has been a year or two, or more... but I remember the Gibbs Rifle Company came with a repro of the 4 Power side-mounted Davidson sight. (Although it was modfied for modern shooters by raising the height to be able to shoot in the modern off-hand or sitting positions rather than the 19th century "back rest" position..

I do not know if they are still in buisness, and their website does not open: Gibbs Rifle Company, Rt. 2, Box 214 Hoffman Rd., Martinsburg, WV 25401, FAX (304) 274-0078. Website at http://www.gibbsrifle.com.

Curt
Company "A," 1st USSS (LH)

[Ken]

Bobby,

Don't know much about this area however this sutler is offering a variety of scopes. Can't say whether this will meet your needs or how good they are, but worth a look anyway

http://cwsutler.hypermart.net/BCA_Scope.html#Stevens

[Marc29thGA]

Bobby,

PAG/LSS is a great group, drop them an e-mail and they can give you more information or at least point you in the right direction.

Kindest Regards,

[BobbyHughes]

Thanks all for the help! As usual, ya'll exceed the bar...

[Gary of CA]

Remember, getting a scope is one thing. Getting the correct mounts is another. There use to be a fellow who made a limited run of reproduction mounts. Even then, you have to have the skill to install them correctly. Those Malcom scopes are nice, but 3/4" diameter may be larger than the original Davidson scope.

[BobbyHughes]

Gary,

OH yes, I've taken all that into account:D I figured that if someone made the scope, they'd have the mounts as well. The only problem I can see with the Malcom scopes is that they are too long, and mount above the barrel, not on the side per the original Davidsons.

[Rebbeh]

I believe these are the scopes they have on the Lee's Sharpshooters website.

http://www.dixiegunworks.com/advanced_search_result.php?keywords=telescopic

[TheRegularsDrummerCo.H]

Hello All,

I am joining the 47th Virginia. Next Year we are going to start doing a Confederate Sharpshoter Impression. What would be better, a Mississippi Rifle of a 2 Band Enfield. Also Did Confederate Sharpshooters have a Certain Insginia on their coat or hat?

________________
Adam Ward
Sykes Regulars
NR

[Silas]

Here are a couple quick links :

http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3423

http://www.chesapeakevolunteerguard.org/ at page 7 - 8 in Volume I, issue 3 of the July, 2006 newsletter.

http://www.cfspress.com/sharpshooters/index.html - The sharpshooter book has much more usable information online than I expected.

After that, you're on your own. You cannot learn much when you're being spoonfed. Also, you'll need to narrow your sharpshooter impression down to a specific brigade instead of "Confederate".

[Marc29thGA]

Adam,

Welcome to a very fascinating subject that has been of great interest to me. A must have on the subject is Fred L. Ray’s book “Shock Troops of the Confederacy” – check Amazon or order it from the third link Silas provided to you.

Happy reading!

[BrianHicks]

Hello All,

I am joining the 47th Virginia. Next Year we are going to start doing a Confederate Sharpshoter Impression. What would be better, a Mississippi Rifle of a 2 Band Enfield. Also Did Confederate Sharpshooters have a Certain Insginia on their coat or hat?

________________
Adam Ward
Sykes Regulars
NR

It would be prudent to carry which ever weapon the folks in the 47th want everyone in their unit to carry. You should ask some one in the 47th which weapon that will be.

Now.... having offered that. Consider this... how many events in the past few years have called for an impression of the 47th Va. or more specifically, how many events have called for an impression of Confederate Sharpshooters? To my recollection... None. If you get items for a specialty impression, how often will you be able to use them? At the events we see promoted on these forums, very rarely.

[TheRegularsDrummerCo.H]

Brian

My Unit Commander said we will do more living Histories than anything. He said whenever we do reenactments we would go out as Skirmishers.

Adam Ward
Sykes Regulars
NR

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo!

Herr Adam...

IMHO sage wisdom being offered above.
IMMO, before proceeding I would:

1. Research and document what arms the 47th Virginia actually used (when and where) , and then check with your unit commanders to see what might be the "unit standard" for your recreated version?

2. I would also look to how your unit is defining or operationalizing "do more living Histories." What does that actually mean in terms of what kind of events, doing what?

3. Skirmish order and skirmishers do not involve sharpshooters or sharpshooter type long-range rifles.

As already shared, "specialty impressions" are, well, limited specialty impressions and do not NUG "fit into" the "authentic campaigning" realm very well.

Curt
Company "A," 1st USSS (LH)
Company "C,", 7th ICOVSS (LH)

[AZReenactor]

Adam,
It really sounds like you are falling into a mainstream reenacting unit where authenticity isn't all that likely to be a real focus. As such, I'd suggest looking for something not too expensive that you can resell later, since if you stick with the hobby you'll likely want to move up at some point in the future. That or do a little reflecting on where you really want to take yourself in the hobby and begin preparing for that goal by purchasing a weapon appropriate to it now. The hobby is a whole lot bigger than the small local group that lets you fall in with them and you may want to explore a little more of it before investing too much in one little specialty impression.

[Todd Watts]

There is a good article on these men in this past month's issue of "The Amercian Rifleman" (NRA magazine). According to it, and a lot I have heard from other sources as well, the standard 3-band Enfield was a very common rifle used by CS sharpshooters. They were typically unscoped as well. Some men wore special glasses that were frosted except a small clear center which did the same thing as modern target shooters' glasses to help the ey focus on the sights and target and blind the shooter from all other activities that could distract him. I have seen a pair of these glasses which were dark amber tinted except a small clear circle in the center of the right lense. Otherwise, they were identical to standard spectacles of the era.

The article also discusses how the CS sharpshooters were largely mis-used/utilized which lead to high casualties to them and minimized their effects.

[Rev]

Todd,
Have you ever seen a pair of the spectacles which were coloured dark red except for the center? My grandfather had a pair which he said belonged to one of his great uncles who was a sharpshooter. One could barely see through the red.

[PvtShot]

Maybe someone in this kid's area might want to invite him to come join the ranks of their unit for more knowledge on accurate or universal immpressions? I think that may be a little more constructive.

Adam, try to contact the Liberty Rifles if you would like to branch and explore a more progressive side of the hobby, they cover several different immpressions and I'm sure they would be happy to have a young recruit who is WILLING to learn. I'm assuming thats why you are on this forum.

Thanks,
Eliot Toscano
The Buckras

SCAR/SRR

[Moose]

Adam,
Being from central Virginia I have done a lot of reserch on the 47th Virginia. I can you tell that the 47th did not have a "sharpshooter" company. So, obtaining a weapon based upon the normal duties of skirmishers does not justify, as others have said, a "sharpshooters" impression, and in this case completly out of historical context for the 47th Virginia.
Now as for what weapon you should look into, go with an Enfield 3-band rifled-musket, or a Harper's Ferry musket. Those whould be your best options for and ANV unit from Virginia.

BTW, what company of the 47th does your unit portray?

PS - for some good reading, pick up Homer D. Musselman's History of the 47th Virginia.

Cheers,

[Silas]

Here's a quick discussion from a few years ago about the so-called sniper glasses : http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3812&highlight=spectacles+sharpshooter

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo!

There are pre 1860 and post 1860 frosted amber "shooters" glasses" as well as green, blue, and red type lens glasses for eye disorders as well as the "treatment" of certain types of vision loss and light sensitivity from syphillis, etc.
Amber lenses were also sold as "landscape" glasses to enhance the appearance of the Outdoors for "vacationers and "strollers."

Curt
Blind Pew Mess

[Rebbeh]

Another neat little book, chock full of information is "Sharpshooters of the American Civil War 1861-65" by Osprey Publishing, writen by Philip Katcher

[DougCooper]

Adam, by now you might be a touch confused, so here is a condensation, so far.

The 47th Virginia did not have a sharpshooter company, according to some folks who have researched it. I did a quick search - found nothing as well.

The 47th Virginia, like all infantry regiments, did have skirmishers - a basic skill of the soldiers.

The 47th Virginia was issued standard long arms, as with other ANV regiments, so try to find out from your new unit, or on your own, what arms they were issued.

Ergo, avoid special glasses, scopes and special rifles if your impression is the 47th Virginia.

If NOT the 47th Virginia, then the most prevalent sharpshooter weapon was probably an Enfield 3 band rifle musket, without a scope.

And at the end of the day, an Enfield is simply a good choice for your CS infantry impression, absent any other more specific info.

But the best advice was that offerred by Curt, Eliot and Troy, et al. You sound like our kind of guy, so look toward joining an authentic unit in your area.

Good luck!

Oh here is another good book on the 47th VA:

Reminiscences of a Rebel [40th & 47th Virginia Infantry]
Dunaway was a member of the 47th Virginia Regiment and saw action at Seven Pines, the Seven Days fighting, Second Manassas, Sharpsburg, Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville. He became Captain of Co. I, 40th Virginia Infantry in 1863, was captured shortly after the Battle of Gettysburg and spent twenty months in the Old Capitol Prison in Washington and later Johnson's Landing in Lake Erie. By Rev. Wayland Dunaway. Hardcover. $25.00.

PS - found an article here by Ley Watson who mentions that the 47th Va was issued Harper's Ferry muskets early on: http://www.47thva.org/pages/articles/bayonet.html

[Rev]

Hallo!

There are pre 1860 and post 1860 frosted amber "shooters" glasses" as well as green, blue, and red type lens glasses for eye disorders as well as the "treatment" of certain types of vision loss and light sensitivity from syphillis, etc.
Amber lenses were also sold as "landscape" glasses to enhance the appearance of the Outdoors for "vacationers and "strollers."

Curt
Blind Pew Mess

From what I can tell these are not the specs for eye disorders. The left lens is completely read and frosted and the right has a small clear center. They look different from any of the therapeutic spectacles I've seen. But, who knows?

[27thNCdrummer]

I would suggest reading Shock Troops of the Confederacy. That should answer all your questions.

[RJSamp]

Hallo!
3. Skirmish order and skirmishers do not involve sharpshooters or sharpshooter type long-range rifles.

Curt
Company "A," 1st USSS (LH)
Company "C,", 7th ICOVSS (LH)

Curt, yes they do......especially Army of Northern Virginia. Start with "Shock Troops of the Confederacy". Eugene Blackford's private papers (quoted extensively throughout the book) are especially revealing. One of the reason's that Iverson gets KO'd severely on July 1st 1863 by Baxter is their lack of a skirmish line....their skirmishers having been organized into the Division Sharpshooter Battalion under Blackford....who were being used to maintain a firepower line from Oak Hill in the West to Gordon's troops by Steven's Run over by 'Barlow's Knoll'.

The simple PEC answer to this thread is a P53 Enfield......2 bander rifles being banned from many reenacting events.

[Minieball577]

"Berry Benson's Civil War Book" is also a great primary source work about rebel sharpshooters. You can get it through Amazon.

[tmdreb]

Being that the only real difference for the most part between CS sharpshooters and "regular" infantry is how they were used, I would think that a standard rifle musket would be your best choice for a weapon.

By yourself, your sharpshooter impression shouldn't look any different from any other CS infantryman, save for the fact that you're more likely to carry a rifled weapon.

[Rebbeh]

Depending on what unit also, you may or may not have a sleeve insignia (this was used in order for officers not to shoot the roaming sharpshooters as mistaken shirkers :p )

[TheRegularsDrummerCo.H]

Hey

Later on Today I will call the commander and ask him what exactly he means by "Sharpshooter".


Adam Ward
Sykes Regulars
NR

[Prodical Reb]

Would these side mounts be the correct mounts for this particualr application?

For those who may be interested this Whitworth is for sale but not by me. I have no part of the sale of this rifle. PM me and I'll give you the details.

[BobbyHughes]

It looks close, but not quite right from the info I have seen. There should be a pivot on the off side of the rifle that has a graduated scale for ranges. The concept was that the rifle elevated and the scope stayed on target.

[Mich8th]

Good Day,

I have not seen this posted as of yet so thought I would do so in case anyone would like to know. In the resent issue of American Rifleman there is a good artical on Confederate Sharpshooters, it is a little short but I thought nicely written. If you have a friend or can find a issue of it, this artical is worth reading.
Mich8th

[guad42]

I read that article. Yes, somewhat interesting. There has been some books written on the subject one of which if "Georgia Sharpshooter" I believe.

Sam Kilborn Dolan

[BobbyHughes]

Depending on what unit also, you may or may not have a sleeve insignia (this was used in order for officers not to shoot the roaming sharpshooters as mistaken shirkers :p )


That also depends on what Theater.. so far from what I have come to understand, the only use of badges by Confederate sharpshooters occured in the ANV. They were not used in the Army of Tenn. (sources Our Connection With Savannah; Shock Troops of the Confederacy; and Sharpshooters of the American Civil War, 1861-1865)

[Rebbeh]

That also depends on what Theater.. so far from what I have come to understand, the only use of badges by Confederate sharpshooters occured in the ANV. They were not used in the Army of Tenn. (sources Our Connection With Savannah; Shock Troops of the Confederacy; and Sharpshooters of the American Civil War, 1861-1865)

True. IMHO I should have been more thorough in my original post

[BobbyHughes]

Curt, yes they do......especially Army of Northern Virginia. Start with "Shock Troops of the Confederacy". Eugene Blackford's private papers (quoted extensively throughout the book) are especially revealing. One of the reason's that Iverson gets KO'd severely on July 1st 1863 by Baxter is their lack of a skirmish line....their skirmishers having been organized into the Division Sharpshooter Battalion under Blackford....who were being used to maintain a firepower line from Oak Hill in the West to Gordon's troops by Steven's Run over by 'Barlow's Knoll'.

The simple PEC answer to this thread is a P53 Enfield......2 bander rifles being banned from many reenacting events.


RJ,

I agree with you. Out here in the west, the organized Sharpshooter battalions were used as skirmishers. For example the 2nd Battn, Georgia Sharpshooters led the advance of Gist's brigade to Franklin and later Nashville as advance guards, and as skirmishers.

As regards the use of "long range rifles" I humbly submit the following:

WAR DEPARTMENT
Adjutant and Inspector General's Office

Richmond, May 3, 1862

General Orders No. 34

I. The following act of Congress, and accompanying regulations, are published for the information of all concerned.

An act to organize battalions of Sharp-shooters (sic)

Sec 1. The Congress of the Confederate States of America do enact, that the Secretary of War may cause to be organized a battalion of sharp-shooters for each brigade, consisting of not less that three nor more than six companies, to be composed of men selected from the brigade, or otherwise, and armed with LONG RANGE MUSKETS OR RIFLES; said companies to be organized and commissioned officers therefore appointed by the President, by the and with the advice and consent of the Senate. Such battalions shall constitute parts of the the brigades to which they belong, and shall have such field and staff officers as are authorized by law for similar battalions, to be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.

Sec 2. Be it further enacted, That for the purpose of arming said battalions, the LONG RANGE MUSKETS AND RIFLES in the hands of troops may be taken for that purpose provided; the Government has not at its command a sufficient number of approved LONG RANGE RIFLES OR MUSKETS wherewith to arm said Corps [Approved April 21, 1862]

II. Generals commanding military departments may cause to be organized within their commands battalions of sharp-shooters, as provided in this act, in such numbers as they may deem necessary, not exceeding one such battalion for each brigade, and will report to the department the organization of such corps, recommending for appointment the commissioned officers allowed by law.

III. In organizing such battalions, Generals commanding may cause such details or transfers to be made as will not reduce any company or corps below the minimum number required by law, taking the men for each such battalion , so far as possible, from the particular brigade of which it is to form part,

IV Requisitions will be made upon the Ordnance department for the arms for such battalions; and, until the said requisitions can be filled, the Generals commanding may cause such exchanges and transfers of LONG RANGE MUSKETS AND RIFLES to be made as may be necessary to arm the said battalion, returning surplus arms, when such requisitions are filled, to the Ordnance department.

V. Supplementary to General Order no 30, Section VI.

The commissions of the staff officers of reorganized regiments and battalions of the twelve months volunteers are not affected by such reorganization, except that of the Adjutant, whose commission expires with that of the commanding officer, if the said officer be not re-elected

By command of the Secretary of War


S. COOPER
Adjutant and Inspector General




I apologize for the Upper case, couldn't figure out how to make the italics work.

The long range rifles and muskets alluded to are no doubt rifled-muskets and 'two banders'

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo!

Yes, IMHO.. the reference is to the 900 and 1000 yard-sighted "Springfield" and "Enfield" type arms.

(My original comment pertained to the heavy, scoped, "target" rifles... ;-) )

Curt

[BobbyHughes]

Curt,

Ya know, I should have thought of that! Just goes to show what a double shift and then too many hours of overtime does to the rational thought process! My humble apologies!

Your Servant,

[Prodical Reb]

Bobby,
While searching black powder sites I came across this site down in your neck of the woods. They had Davidson mounts for whitworth rifles. Check them out as I not to up on this particular application.

http://www.bearclawstradingpost.com/whitworth.html

They really FARBed this whitworth by mounting a older Weaver 2X scope but it gets the picture across of mounting a scope.

[Marc29thGA]

I found some information to add to this monster thread:

I am currently reading, “First regiment Engineer Troops P.A.C.S – Robert E. Lee’s Combat Engineers” by Harry L. Jackson. While reading last night, on pages 68 & 69, the 1st Regt was doing some engineering work in support of the Sharpshooters.

The first device described was kind of a mini embrasure, like for cannon, made of heavy timber and wrought iron. Although it provided good protection for the Sharpshooter, the device attracted the wrath of artillery.

The second device was a box about 4 feet long and 6-8 inches square that would carry the smoke of the discharge of his weapon a few feet to the left or right. Thus return fire from the Federal lines was diverted out of harms way for the shooter. Apparently the device was so successful, that over 1500 were produced in just a few days for use on the parapets of the trenches.

[Gary of CA]

Since the subject of patches came up, here's a paper that has a short discussion on the topic: Link (http://www.bivouacbooks.com/bbv7i1s1.htm)