Thomas it is always a pleasure to get your feedback. I was always under the impression that the Southern boys were good shots. Could you go into more details about this?
I am not Thomas, but I'll give you a documented, real world example of the quality of Confederate "marksmanship":
The mythology of the Civil War asserts that Confederate troops were better shots their Federal opponents, but the available evidence does not necessarily support that conclusion. Responding to an order from Lieutenant General William J. Hardee, Major General Patrick Cleburne directed the testing of .54 caliber Austrian rifle muskets at 100, 150, 200, and 300 yards [91, 137, 182, and 274 meters] using two lots of ammunition; one manufactured in England and the other at the Atlanta Arsenal. Given the large percentage of Muster 1854, Type I, rifle muskets in Major Caleb Huse’s purchases from the Austrian Army, the Austrian rifles involved in the tests were probably Type I weapons. On 19 June 1863 Captain Charles F. Vanderford, Cleburne's division ordnance officer, reported on the resulting tests. He had been directed to use a company of
average soldiers from the 6
th, 10
th, and 15
th Texas Consolidated Infantry Regiment of Cleburne’s Division. Although the troops had been in service for a year and a half, Vanderford discovered during the 100-yard phase of his test that three quarters of them had never been instructed on how to load, aim, and fire military shoulder arms. Contrary to the legend of Texican marksmanship in the American west the troops’ accuracy of fire was extremely poor. The weather conditions during the 100-yard test on 18 June had been perfect; cloudy, dry, and windless. Each of the 20 men involved in the 100-yard test fired one shot using Atlanta Arsenal ammunition at a 10-foot high by six-foot wide target, achieving an aggregate 13 hits. None of the rounds hit the black painted six-inch [15.2 cm] bullseye at the center of the target. Prior to continuing testing Vanderford had to instruct the men in basic marksmanship. [emphasis in original] (Vanderford’s Report, 19 June 1863, National Civil War Museum)
After instructing the soldiers on how to load and take aim Vanderford continued his test with five selected soldiers. The weather conditions remained the same; cloudy, dry, and windless. Firing 20 rounds of English manufactured ammunition at 150 yards, the troops achieved 18 hits. All the hits were in a group considerably tighter than the hits from the Atlanta Arsenal ammunition used at 100 yards. It is not clear from the report if the improvement was due to the use of English ammunition or the marksmanship instruction given the selected troops, although I suspect that it resulted from the training. (Vanderford’s Report, 19 June 1863, National Civil War Museum)
Vanderford continued the tests on 19 June. At 200 yards he selected 10 soldiers of “average ability as marksmen.” Firing 10 rounds of Atlanta Arsenal ammunition and 13 rounds of English ammunition they achieved 14 hits. Continuing with the 10 selected men at 300 yards they fired 27 rounds of Atlanta Arsenal ammunition and 16 rounds of English ammunition, achieving 12 hits. The weather conditions were again excellent; sunny with white clouds, dry, and with a light breeze from the front. (Vanderford’s Report, 19 June 1863, National Civil War Museum)
Vanderford clearly did not have a good understanding of the scientific method. Since the troops fired a mix of Atlanta Arsenal and English ammunition at 200 and 300 yards it is impossible to determine how well each of the lots of ammunition performed, although Vanderford observed that the “English cartridge gave much better results than the Atlanta [Arsenal cartridges]. The data obtained today and yesterday was, however, insufficient for any accurate comparison between the two.” Nor did Vanderford have a good understanding of the sights on the Austrian rifles, noting that:
“In firing at 300 yards distance, it appears that neither the Atlanta nor the English cartridge gave proper results,
the guns being sighted directly upon the center of the target. Three fourths of the ‘misses’ fall too low, nearly one half striking the butts below the lower line of the target. This is perhaps attributable principally to the considerable windage of the guns, the balls being too small for target practice. This by no means a fault, however, the difficulty being (usually) to load [the] guns after the 12
th or 15
th round.” [emphasis added] (Vanderford’s Report, 19 June 1863, National Civil War Museum)
Given the calibration of the Austrian rifle sights in
Schritt and the arched trajectory of the bullets, Vanderford achieved at 300 yards exactly the result one would expect from troops and an officer who had no understanding of the battle sights on their Austrian rifles. The possibility also exists that Vanderford did not understand that the bullets from the English cartridges were supposed to be loaded in the greased cartridge wrappers and that he instructed his test troops to remove the wrappers. Since the Texans’ weapons were fouling by the 12
th to 15
th round there is also reason to question the soldiers’ maintenance of their weapons. Vanderford or his superiors passed the results of the test up their chain of command because Colonel Mallet acknowledged receipt of a copy of the test report from Brigadier General Gorgas on 3 August 1863. (Thomas,
Round Ball to Rimfire, IV, 97)
So, one has troops who have been in the Confederate Army for a year and a half with NO marksmanship instruction by their officers and NCOs, and a division ordnance officer who has no clue about basic ballistics. Neither the soldiers nor the officer had a clue about how to use the sights on their weapons. But the Confederate Army and the Confederate soldier was the best in the world. If you had put them up against good European troops these Texicans would have been butchered, and Cleburne's people were reputedly amongst the best the Confederate Army had to offer.
Regards,
Don Dixon