Army Life And Marksmanship

[Old Soldier]

I dunno.
The English had A LOT of fun messing around with France for centuries afterwards.
If they were more isolationist, they would have missed out on a lot of the action.

Actually the English Crown owned about a third of France at one time. We lost the last bit - Calais - in 1558. We in the North of England actually call him Billy the Bas ard for what he did to us in 1070 - the Harrying of the North.

 

[Old Soldier]

I can only assume the NRA was using the specifications from the Army for the annual shooting competition; the A, B & C Classes under the 1859 specifications detailed in the Field Exercises & Evolutions of Infantry also call for the target to be at dimensions of 6ft. by 2ft. I forget if that changes in the '61 or '63 revisions (or subsequent) or anything about exact "bullseyes" for comparison.

Yes, they were. That was the general idea, to get the volunteers shooting like the regulars. The 6x2 targets were used for the shorter range competitions at 100, 200 and 300 yards (Standing, unsupported). The later targets at distance were concentric circles.

 

[bayonet]

How'd you guess that? Although in all seriousness, I've had to write lots in short order all my life, most of these posts I have done quite quickly. Depending on what kind of English teachers we each had, you may remember having to write 8 pages within a single lesson to leave. Besides, in at least my generation texting is fairly lengthy, I should send you any texts from any women I know! Paragraphs are not uncommon. I just know how to get a lot of information out quickly; usually helps if the knowledge or sources are already nearby.

"write 8 pages", "English teachers"? What schools you go to. I was too busy checking out the girls in class like most 13-18 year old boys going thru the changes to ones body. Sadly schools back then were different from today. The only skin exposed on girls back then was their kneecaps. Oh those kneecaps ooohhh lala and the Farah Fawsett hairdo!

 

[Old Soldier]

"write 8 pages", "English teachers"? What schools you go to. I was too busy checking out the girls in class like most 13-18 year old boys going thru the changes to ones body. Sadly schools back then were different from today. The only skin exposed on girls back then was their kneecaps. Oh those kneecaps ooohhh lala and the Farah Fawsett hairdo!

Girls in Class? No mixed Grammar Schools then. I went to Middlesbrough BOYS High School!

 

[ArcLight]

"write 8 pages", "English teachers"? What schools you go to. I was too busy checking out the girls in class like most 13-18 year old boys going thru the changes to ones body. Sadly schools back then were different from today. The only skin exposed on girls back then was their kneecaps. Oh those kneecaps ooohhh lala and the Farah Fawsett hairdo!

Farah Fawsett?
Check out Diana Rigg in the Avengers!

I enjoy watching shows from the 60s and 70s, not for the story, but for the costumes/hair styles/car styles/ home furnishing/expressions.

 

[gary]

Girls in Class? No mixed Grammar Schools then. I went to Middlesbrough BOYS High School!

Terribly sorry ole' boy.

 

[Old Soldier]

Terribly sorry ole' boy.

You will be!! It was a local authority grammar school! Not a posh private school.

 

[gary]

French School of Musketry (from link)

SCHOOL OF MUSKETRY​

The School of Musketry, formed by the Ministerial Order of 29th March, 1842, was only intended at first to supply instructors to the ten battalions of Chasseurs who were armed with rifles. The results of its establishment were, however, found so valuable, that the benefits of the instruction it afforded were by degrees extended to the whole army.

In 1845, the Duc d'Aumale, who had taken a special interest in the improvement of fire-arms and the better instruction of the soldier in their use, was nominated Inspector-General of Schools of Musketry. Besides the chief school at Vincennes, others were formed in the principal garrisons; and eventually a regimental School of Musketry was established in every regiment of infantry.

Some changes have been made in the system established under the Duke. The School of Musketry at Vincennes has only been regularly organized on its present footing since 1852. A portion of the fortress affords the accommodation required for the theoretical instruction, while the Polygon offers admirable facilities for practical instruction and target practice.

The Staff of the School consists of,—

A Commandant, a Lieut.-Colonel of Infantry.

An Instructor in Musketry, a Major of Infantry.

A Professor, a Captain of Artillery.

An Assistant Professor, a Captain of Artillery.

A Sub-Instructor in Musketry, a Captain of Infantry.
Each regiment sends an Officer (a Sub-Lieutenant or a Lieutenant) to Vincennes, to go through the course of instruction. The course commences on the 1st of March, and lasts four months. Two hours a day three times a week are devoted to lectures on the construction and use of fire-arms, and the theory of projectiles. Each officer is required to complete a certain number of drawings of the separate parts of arms. At the termination of the course, certificates are given, and, if favorable, go towards the officer's claim to be promoted "au choix."

We were conducted over the rooms of the fortress set apart for the school by the officer charged with the Theoretical Instruction (Captain Févre, of the Artillery.) They consist of a large paved

260​

room, where the officers perform their small-arm exercise in bad weather; of the study-room, in which the drawings are executed; of a lecture-room or amphitheater; of the library, chiefly supplied with technical works on arms; and of a model-room, containing a very good collection of French and foreign arms, and of portions of arms, to illustrate the lectures. There are, besides, private rooms for the instructors, and a room for the orderlies. On the ground floor a small forge has been fitted up for the purpose of giving practical instruction in some of the details of the manufacture of arms.

To produce accurate marksmen is not the only object of the School of Musketry. Its staff may be considered a description of standing committee, to whom inventions in arms and ammunition are submitted, to have their qualities practically tested. On the day of our visits experiments on the relative merits of three forms of balls were being carried on, which we witnessed.

Quitting the fortress by a bridge over the ditch, in an angle of which the Duc d'Enghien was shot, we entered on the Polygon or practice ground. In a few minutes two detachments of troops, one from the Chasseurs de Vincennes, the other from the 20th regiment of the line, arrived and took up their ground in front of the practice butts. Of the balls between which comparisons were to be made, one was proposed by M. Minié, who was himself present, another by M. Nessler, the third was named the ball "de la garde." There were six targets in line in front of the butt; the Chasseurs fired at three of them, and the 20th regiment at the other three. A trench runs along parallel to the butts, and at a few yards in front of them. The line of targets is in the space between the trench and the butts. The trench gives cover to the range party, one of whom is stationed opposite to each target, in a rude recess cut into the side of the trench, to afford shelter in wet weather. Each time a target is struck, the man opposite to it raises his banderol, which is then seen by the firing party, and acknowledged.

The trench is continued to some distance beyond the butts, and is there met by another trench at right angles to it; so that one may go up from the firing party to the range party without any risk.

On the cessation of the firing, the officer in command of the range party numbered the hits in each target. He marked separately the hits where the balls had arrived sideways (shown by the form of the perforation,) a very important consideration in comparative experiments with oblong balls.

Prizes and honorable mentions are bestowed annually on the best shots. The number of the regiment and the names of the men thus distinguished are inserted in the official military journal.

261

 

[Will Carry]

This is the rifle that made me the best shot in the county. A single shot, 22LR, breach loader that my father bought for $8 in 1936. "But DAD, all the other kids have tube fed semi-automatics and lever action repeaters." I would whine. My father was steadfast. "This rifle will make you a better shot." and that was the end of the argument. He was right. After hours and hours of practice, I was hitting targets at 300 yards with open sights.

My heart goes out to the moderators for this is off topic, it's OK. It does demonstrate how an individual soldier can become a sharp shooter.

 

[DoctorKingSchultz]

"write 8 pages", "English teachers"? What schools you go to. I was too busy checking out the girls in class like most 13-18 year old boys going thru the changes to ones body. Sadly schools back then were different from today. The only skin exposed on girls back then was their kneecaps. Oh those kneecaps ooohhh lala and the Farah Fawsett hairdo!

I was too, but I can multi-task! I get the impression it might just be a generational difference - especially based on that Farah Fawsett mention!

 

[DoctorKingSchultz]

French School of Musketry (from link)

SCHOOL OF MUSKETRY​

The School of Musketry, formed by the Ministerial Order of 29th March, 1842, was only intended at first to supply instructors to the ten battalions of Chasseurs who were armed with rifles. The results of its establishment were, however, found so valuable, that the benefits of the instruction it afforded were by degrees extended to the whole army.

In 1845, the Duc d'Aumale, who had taken a special interest in the improvement of fire-arms and the better instruction of the soldier in their use, was nominated Inspector-General of Schools of Musketry. Besides the chief school at Vincennes, others were formed in the principal garrisons; and eventually a regimental School of Musketry was established in every regiment of infantry.

Some changes have been made in the system established under the Duke. The School of Musketry at Vincennes has only been regularly organized on its present footing since 1852. A portion of the fortress affords the accommodation required for the theoretical instruction, while the Polygon offers admirable facilities for practical instruction and target practice.

The Staff of the School consists of,—

A Commandant, a Lieut.-Colonel of Infantry.

An Instructor in Musketry, a Major of Infantry.

A Professor, a Captain of Artillery.

An Assistant Professor, a Captain of Artillery.

A Sub-Instructor in Musketry, a Captain of Infantry.
Each regiment sends an Officer (a Sub-Lieutenant or a Lieutenant) to Vincennes, to go through the course of instruction. The course commences on the 1st of March, and lasts four months. Two hours a day three times a week are devoted to lectures on the construction and use of fire-arms, and the theory of projectiles. Each officer is required to complete a certain number of drawings of the separate parts of arms. At the termination of the course, certificates are given, and, if favorable, go towards the officer's claim to be promoted "au choix."

We were conducted over the rooms of the fortress set apart for the school by the officer charged with the Theoretical Instruction (Captain Févre, of the Artillery.) They consist of a large paved

260​

room, where the officers perform their small-arm exercise in bad weather; of the study-room, in which the drawings are executed; of a lecture-room or amphitheater; of the library, chiefly supplied with technical works on arms; and of a model-room, containing a very good collection of French and foreign arms, and of portions of arms, to illustrate the lectures. There are, besides, private rooms for the instructors, and a room for the orderlies. On the ground floor a small forge has been fitted up for the purpose of giving practical instruction in some of the details of the manufacture of arms.

To produce accurate marksmen is not the only object of the School of Musketry. Its staff may be considered a description of standing committee, to whom inventions in arms and ammunition are submitted, to have their qualities practically tested. On the day of our visits experiments on the relative merits of three forms of balls were being carried on, which we witnessed.

Quitting the fortress by a bridge over the ditch, in an angle of which the Duc d'Enghien was shot, we entered on the Polygon or practice ground. In a few minutes two detachments of troops, one from the Chasseurs de Vincennes, the other from the 20th regiment of the line, arrived and took up their ground in front of the practice butts. Of the balls between which comparisons were to be made, one was proposed by M. Minié, who was himself present, another by M. Nessler, the third was named the ball "de la garde." There were six targets in line in front of the butt; the Chasseurs fired at three of them, and the 20th regiment at the other three. A trench runs along parallel to the butts, and at a few yards in front of them. The line of targets is in the space between the trench and the butts. The trench gives cover to the range party, one of whom is stationed opposite to each target, in a rude recess cut into the side of the trench, to afford shelter in wet weather. Each time a target is struck, the man opposite to it raises his banderol, which is then seen by the firing party, and acknowledged.

The trench is continued to some distance beyond the butts, and is there met by another trench at right angles to it; so that one may go up from the firing party to the range party without any risk.

On the cessation of the firing, the officer in command of the range party numbered the hits in each target. He marked separately the hits where the balls had arrived sideways (shown by the form of the perforation,) a very important consideration in comparative experiments with oblong balls.

Prizes and honorable mentions are bestowed annually on the best shots. The number of the regiment and the names of the men thus distinguished are inserted in the official military journal.

261

Brilliant - this is a great addition the the reanimated conversation and counterpart to my own posts that, initially unintentionally, primarily cover the British only. I had forgotten the French school of musketry predates Hythe, though it makes sense considering they pioneered the pillar-breech and eventual expanding-bullet ballistic systems since at least the same years the Texian Revolution was fought..

On a somewhat related note to the greater conversation as a whole - aside from only being familiar with very outdated and few European manuals, I would think either assuming Crimean-era (or earlier) dress uniforms are representative of ordinary uniforms in the field for most European armies probably has something to do with certain perceptions of it. Vast majority of European field uniforms of the 1860s are very identical to American uniforms; Danes, Dutch, Swedish, Belgian come to mind as all wearing short, dark-blue frock coats and light blue trousers as an accurate description of typical infantry uniform in their armies, paired with German or Austrian-style Feldmützen or French Kepi (or forage cap). The rest have similar colors most of the time, peaked caps and bonnet de police if not the others, and the French-tilt shako for most militaries, in decreasing heights since the mid-1850s. I have heard it suggested that in fact, the Americans even pioneered simpler uniforms; they did not at all, and while many European armies' dress uniforms are known for their color and pomp, most of their actual field uniforms are strikingly similar to Civil War uniforms.

All military headgear is at its shortest (partly due to the fashion of very short hats that characterize the 1860s; middle aged men still wear stovepipes but unrepresentative of new fashions) and generally, many long-lasting designs of uniforms had been adopted; the various Germanic (and soon, German) uniforms are very comparable to that of a half-century later (Many items directly "186-" patterns in fact in the Great War or direct derivatives, i.e. field cap and boots in circulation) and many dress uniforms as discussed before have direct influence on modern armies; where shakos still exist in dress uniform it is the French-tilt style, and virtually every dress uniform comes with a short frock coat (usually called a "dress tunic" both then and now).
The general look of a soldier with much more emphasis on comfort, subdued insignia and ease of movement is present in almost every post-Crimean uniform, and that is why even the redcoat is so often ditched when the British go to actual war much of the time between 1856 and 1884; perceptions of wars such as the Zulu War or first Boer War (unique in retaining the redcoat, and the former situationally forced into close-order by being outnumbered often literally 30:1) and lack in popularity of very contrasting conflicts predating them likely also has something to do with all that.

I have digitally kept thousands of researched images in files since about 2018 for mostly-1860s photographs, I'm away now but I might later edit this post to give some additional examples pre-1866 that show very well how much the Union Army's basic uniform resembles many European.

 

[DoctorKingSchultz]

This is the rifle that made me the best shot in the county. A single shot, 22LR, breach loader that my father bought for $8 in 1936. "But DAD, all the other kids have tube fed semi-automatics and lever action repeaters." I would whine. My father was steadfast. "This rifle will make you a better shot." and that was the end of the argument. He was right. After hours and hours of practice, I was hitting targets at 300 yards with open sights.

My heart goes out to the moderators for this is off topic, it's OK. It does demonstrate how an individual soldier can become a sharp shooter.

View attachment 586158

I cannot entirely relate except for the fact that, one of my earliest memories of shooting (and my first rifle) was a .22 bolt-action rifle, if I remember correctly it was a Winchester 70. May be off-topic but a good memory you brought up. I didn't complain, loved to shoot it though. I grew up between the US and UK so needlessly to say an interesting existence.

 

[Old Soldier]

This is the rifle that made me the best shot in the county. A single shot, 22LR, breach loader that my father bought for $8 in 1936. "But DAD, all the other kids have tube fed semi-automatics and lever action repeaters." I would whine. My father was steadfast. "This rifle will make you a better shot." and that was the end of the argument. He was right. After hours and hours of practice, I was hitting targets at 300 yards with open sights.

My heart goes out to the moderators for this is off topic, it's OK. It does demonstrate how an individual soldier can become a sharp shooter.

View attachment 586158

Yes it does. But remember that many volunteers in the early years went off to war never having shot their rifles or muskets, never mind trained to shoot. Sure, they could load 3 rounds per minute, but few were taught HOW to shoot. Like the old days of musketry they just pointed it in the right direction and BANG.

The M1861/63 tells the story of US marksmanship training in the civil war. The back sight had three ranges 100, 300 and 500. (Most European rifles went from 100 to 1000 - in 50 Yard 'clicks'). Trouble is, no one taught them how to aim - never mind aim off to 200, 400 and 600 yards. Much is made of the 'high' shots on buildings, which only proves they did not know how to set sights or aim. Most of the rifles were used in firefights at 300 yards or less. A company shoot could have been used to create a 'beaten zone' at 1,000 yards - or even 600 yards - but it seems it was never, if ever, used. The bullet from a ML rifle of that time was capable of killing at 1,000 yards but at the ranges it was used at, it shattered bones and prompted many amputations, it was that powerful.

 

[DoctorKingSchultz]

Yes it does. But remember that many volunteers in the early years went off to war never having shot their rifles or muskets, never mind trained to shoot. Sure, they could load 3 rounds per minute, but few were taught HOW to shoot. Like the old days of musketry they just pointed it in the right direction and BANG.

The M1861/63 tells the story of US marksmanship training in the civil war. The back sight had three ranges 100, 300 and 500. (Most European rifles went from 100 to 1000 - in 50 Yard 'clicks'). Trouble is, no one taught them how to aim - never mind aim off to 200, 400 and 600 yards. Much is made of the 'high' shots on buildings, which only proves they did not know how to set sights or aim. Most of the rifles were used in firefights at 300 yards or less. A company shoot could have been used to create a 'beaten zone' at 1,000 yards - or even 600 yards - but it seems it was never, if ever, used. The bullet from a ML rifle of that time was capable of killing at 1,000 yards but at the ranges it was used at, it shattered bones and prompted many amputations, it was that powerful.

The importance of marksmanship, as well, of just about any rifle-musket compared with plenty of other rifles cannot be overstated either; these need training more than if the army was outfitted with plenty of other guns. It's not the easiest gun to learn.
As stated there, the army needed to learn how to shoot, and I've tried to briefly highlight just how seriously the armies that were making the best use rifle-muskets ever saw actually did so - there are some threads here convinced soldiers that knew how to shoot a squirrel could automatically master them. Armies need training, and no amount of bubba shooting can really make up for it. Especially not with these guns. The proof is in the pudding. You know all that though, just mentioning it for the next one.


On that note, I wonder if the misconception that the Revolution a century earlier was won by entirely irregular "farmers" using nothing but guerrilla tactics (or lack of any tactics other than country shooting), winning single-handedly at that, with minor external aid, has something to do with the notion had that simple rifle experience would enable soldiers to automatically become snipers - au lieu of needing actual rifle training.

 

[gary]

Round ball rifles were the most common rifle in American. While some Americans were aware of the minie ball, I've yet to find evidence that a minie rifle was produced by a civilian gunsmith for a customer. The gunsmith would also have to provide a mould for the gun (which requires making a cherry to cut the mold). There were books that discussed the new bullets, but did any civilian ever read them?

Civil War soldiers' training consisted of drill and every little emphasis was given on marksmanship. Many of the officers were equally ignorant on the subject matter. Volunteer officers from civilian life whether they were an attorney, town leader, businessman, was probably totally ignronat about the minie ball and its potential. Everybody was learning the school of the soldier, school of the battalion and not shooting theory. Cleburne and Heth were exceptions with the latter putting it in practice before the war and the former a corporal in the olde' english army who had in his possession a Horse Guards Manual.

I've never read of an American reading Hans Busk books either.

I wonder if the misconception that the Revolution a century earlier was won by entirely irregular "farmers" using nothing but guerrilla tactics

The American Revolution was won conventionally. Only a few battles are attributable to riflemen (King's Mountain, Moore's Creek Bridge). The Revolution was won not so much by feat of arms but because it became a global conflict and the Crown couldn't afford too fight in the American colonies when other interests (India, Carribeans0 yielded greater profit. Spain and France played a huge role in making Britain give up the American colonies.

BTW, when I was in Portsmouth I met some elderly Elnglish who still referred to Estados Unidos as The Colonies. The Englsihwoman remembered the zeppelin came to bomb them.

 

[bayonet]

Farah Fawsett?
Check out Diana Rigg in the Avengers!

I enjoy watching shows from the 60s and 70s, not for the story, but for the costumes/hair styles/car styles/ home furnishing/expressions.

Oh yeah Diana Rigg was smoking hot! I still dream of the Jeannie (Barbara Eden) in I DREAM OF JEANNIE. I wish I was her Master

 

[DoctorKingSchultz]

The American Revolution was won conventionally. Only a few battles are attributable to riflemen (King's Mountain, Moore's Creek Bridge). The Revolution was won not so much by feat of arms but because it became a global conflict and the Crown couldn't afford too fight in the American colonies when other interests (India, Carribeans0 yielded greater profit. Spain and France played a huge role in making Britain give up the American colonies.

Right; and this is what any scholars, or any serious study of that war beyond surface levels more or less always says - and what I was getting at. A very common perception of that war, possibly exasperated by, or perhaps showing its own prevalence through the way it was decided to depict movies like The Patriot from 2000 for example.

It would make sense then, believing this misconception that the country that supposedly produced the best rifle shootin' country bumpkins ever in at its birth, was then able to make remarkable use of Minié rifles in the Civil War. This underdog narrative of the Revolution, implying irregular militia riflemen won the war single-handed or mostly themselves perhaps might even come into the other misconception of the US more or less "saving" the allies in the Great War, although that is a much longer conversation and frankly well off-topic.

 

[Old Soldier]

On that note, I wonder if the misconception that the Revolution a century earlier was won by entirely irregular "farmers" using nothing but guerrilla tactics (or lack of any tactics other than country shooting), winning single-handedly at that, with minor external aid, has something to do with the notion had that simple rifle experience would enable soldiers to automatically become snipers - au lieu of needing actual rifle training.

The simple fact is that few of the city and town volunteers had ever held a rifle, never mind fired it. Yes, there were some natural marksmen, but most hadn't a clue what to do. Neither had their instructors. There were simply not enough instructors to go around, so they used the old guys. Most would have been familiar with the percussion musket - there were plenty available - but they were not trained in the military use of the rifle for line regiments. Yes, rifles had been issued before, but how many who had used them in the Mexican Wars were still around?

I am not counting breechloaders in this as many were woefully lacking in power and accuracy as most were carbines for cavalry. Only the Sharps RIFLE stood out. They were really experiments getting evaluated in real action. Ammunition supply was critical.

Let's make it clear. There were NOT regular - full-time professional - soldiers. Many instructors will have come from the State Militias - still using smoothbore muskets. They were teaching the DRILLS, to ensure the recruits could match their fire with regular soldiers - but they were not teaching them how to shoot. The percussion musket could fire three rounds, perhaps four, a minute and had an effective range of no more than 150 yards. The new Minie rifles had the same rate of fire, but an effective range of 400 yards, 600 in trained hands, and up to 1,000 for unit area fire, but these guys were not being trained how to make use of that technical advance. It takes time to produce a marksman (or even a decent shot) and they were not given that time. The generals wanted troops in the field, ready to go, so the instructors made it so. What they didn't get was marksmen.

The generals too, did not appreciate what a trained rifleman could do, should do, and deployed their troops as they always used to - as musket armed infantry. They expected nothing more. Even the trained Sharpshooter battalions, with accurate Sharps rifles, were deployed as line infantry! The concept of unit (company) fire and the 'beaten zone' at long range seems to have been totally ignored - and left to artillery.

A company firing at a battery in the field at 600-1000 yards was perfectly feasible and would have effectively caused the battery to cease fire and move away. Was that ever done?

 

[gary]

It would make sense then, believing this misconception that the country that supposedly produced the best rifle shootin' country bumpkins ever in at its birth, was then able to make remarkable use of Minié rifles in the Civil War. This underdog narrative of the Revolution, implying irregular militia riflemen won the war single-handed or mostly themselves perhaps might even come into the other misconception of the US more or less "saving" the allies in the Great War, although that is a much longer conversation and frankly well off-topic.

Concur.

The best county bumpkins won't know the ballistics of a minie rifle. It's different from his round ball rifle and the kentucky windage he used. He's still going to have to shoot enough to learn his gun and the minie's drop. Soldiers who kept shooting at the same target eventually figure out the hold for that object.

BTW, I don't think we were a nation of riflemen in 1775. We were a nation of shooters. Rifles were a rare thing in New England and most New Englanders used buck 'n ball. Where the Swiss/Germans settled there were a lot of rifes: Pennsyvlania & Virginia and going south from there they spread to the Carolinas. Privately owned rifles were more common post-Revolution.

I'm waiting for Wallace Gusler's book to come out.

 

[yulzari]

Actually the English Crown owned about a third of France at one time. We lost the last bit - Calais - in 1558. We in the North of England actually call him Billy the Bas ard for what he did to us in 1070 - the Harrying of the North.

The English were still ruled by the French Angevins who were far more interested in their lands in France and their ongoing (100 years) civil war there. England was effectively a colony used to provide finance and colonial troops. I was once attached to another battalion whose Adjutant had the three HQ Land Rovers named tactfully Agincourt, Poitiers and Crecy. One night I corrected their painted manes to Azincourt, Poictiers and Crècy and named mine Chatillon. He was very pleased with Chatillon and had no idea it was the last battle which ended English rule in France. Pompous little ventral vent.