Tell me more! How were artillerymen trained?

Joined
Aug 1, 2018
Location
Nashville, TN
Thank you. I'm doing some research for a novel.

How did artillerymen train? I assume they first spent weeks learning how to march and use a rifle before they got to the big guns. Did they practice the motions of cleaning, loading, and firing without ammo? Did they get to do a lot of live fire training? Did they do a lot of target practice or were they more concerned with their rate of fire leaving aiming to their NCOs and officers?

Any insight you have is appreciated. I'm particularly concerned with the 6th USCHA. I believe the trained at Fort Granger in Memphis. They had two mountain Howitzers, two 6-pound James guns, and eventually two 10-pound Parrot rifles. They were called "heavy artillery," but aren't these field guns?

Thanks,

Cody
 
To answer question #2 first, field artillery usually consisted of any piece up to 20# because bigger than that; they were extremely difficult to transport.
Now, as for Question #1, since much of the military way of doing things hasn't changed in quite a while; a modern Marine's artillery training (and Army since they are both now trained at Fort Sill,OK) consists of basic military skills (boot camp, infantry training and then on to specialty training). They start with the basics of the piece and move on to what each position does and they practice what each position does with each member of the crew until all members are proficient at each position. It takes a while before they ever get to live firing and then it is closely supervised. The aiming and firing of the piece was then and still is an art. The biggest difference between then and now is that during the Civil War most of the units all started from scratch with the same personnel and now they are used as replacements for existing units. The most proficient Civil War units were usually those that had the most combat experience and the ones that continued training during their service. These were also the ones that had the biggest turnover of personnel due to casualties and so new personnel were constantly being added and having to be trained. There are times during the Civil War that pieces were served by a single person due to casualties and infantrymen could (and would) be dragooned to serve the pieces as member of the gun crews.
 
To answer question #2 first, field artillery usually consisted of any piece up to 20# because bigger than that; they were extremely difficult to transport.
Now, as for Question #1, since much of the military way of doing things hasn't changed in quite a while; a modern Marine's artillery training (and Army since they are both now trained at Fort Sill,OK) consists of basic military skills (boot camp, infantry training and then on to specialty training). They start with the basics of the piece and move on to what each position does and they practice what each position does with each member of the crew until all members are proficient at each position. It takes a while before they ever get to live firing and then it is closely supervised. The aiming and firing of the piece was then and still is an art. The biggest difference between then and now is that during the Civil War most of the units all started from scratch with the same personnel and now they are used as replacements for existing units. The most proficient Civil War units were usually those that had the most combat experience and the ones that continued training during their service. These were also the ones that had the biggest turnover of personnel due to casualties and so new personnel were constantly being added and having to be trained. There are times during the Civil War that pieces were served by a single person due to casualties and infantrymen could (and would) be dragooned to serve the pieces as member of the gun crews.
Thank you. This helps.
 
...... They had two mountain Howitzers, two 6-pound James guns, and eventually two 10-pound Parrot rifles. They were called "heavy artillery," but aren't these field guns?

Thanks,

Cody

While Heavy Artillery regiments were typically associated with the larger Siege and Garrison guns, I would not be surprised if they used what ever guns were available if the larger guns could not be provided. Heavy Artillery regiments were also trained as infantry, as they were frequently used for guard duty. When looking at regimental histories, many times Heavy Artillery regiments were used as infantry or assigned to non artillery duties in rear areas as the rest of the army moved forwards. It was not uncommon for Heavy Artillery Regiments do do just about everything except artillery duty. They would be assigned a wide variety of duties like guarding prisoners, Supply Lines, Foraging - just about anything that command did not want the front line troops to be doing.
 
Thank you. I'm doing some research for a novel.

How did artillerymen train? I assume they first spent weeks learning how to march and use a rifle before they got to the big guns. Did they practice the motions of cleaning, loading, and firing without ammo? Did they get to do a lot of live fire training? Did they do a lot of target practice or were they more concerned with their rate of fire leaving aiming to their NCOs and officers?

Any insight you have is appreciated. I'm particularly concerned with the 6th USCHA. I believe the trained at Fort Granger in Memphis. They had two mountain Howitzers, two 6-pound James guns, and eventually two 10-pound Parrot rifles. They were called "heavy artillery," but aren't these field guns?

Thanks,

Cody
Regarding training, here's a good example involving the 1st Minnesota Light (which fought at Shiloh, Corinth, Vicksburg, and in the Atlanta Campaign). In December 1861 they reported to St. Louis. They had not yet been issued their guns (that would happen late January 1862). They spent their time in what one might call infantry drilling, handling sidearms, doing sword exercises, etc. Once they received their guns they trained in accordance with (it appears) the War Department Instruction manual for school of the piece and school of the battery. A lot of batteries probably followed this pattern at the outset as horses and guns were in the process of being issued. In Massachusetts field artillery-specific camps were set up outside Boston. The regular US batteries, of course, were generally just following the drill in the official manual. I've seen some references to live fire drill but believe that was unusual. Somebody else may have a take on that. The important concern was that each crew member know how to perform the duties of each position on the crew.
 
Regarding training, here's a good example involving the 1st Minnesota Light (which fought at Shiloh, Corinth, Vicksburg, and in the Atlanta Campaign). In December 1861 they reported to St. Louis. They had not yet been issued their guns (that would happen late January 1862). They spent their time in what one might call infantry drilling, handling sidearms, doing sword exercises, etc. Once they received their guns they trained in accordance with (it appears) the War Department Instruction manual for school of the piece and school of the battery. A lot of batteries probably followed this pattern at the outset as horses and guns were in the process of being issued. In Massachusetts field artillery-specific camps were set up outside Boston. The regular US batteries, of course, were generally just following the drill in the official manual. I've seen some references to live fire drill but believe that was unusual. Somebody else may have a take on that. The important concern was that each crew member know how to perform the duties of each position on the crew.
Thank you
 
They drilled morning noon & night. They drilled until every movement was pure muscle memory. Limber to the front, limber to the rear, diminished number drill, you name it. After the battle of Stones River, artillery battery drills drew crowds of off duty spectators. The description sounds a lot like what our annual battery programs are like. In the Army of the Cumberland during the winter & spring of 1863, infantry & artillery made regular patrols to prepare them for the projected June offensive.
 
They drilled morning noon & night. They drilled until every movement was pure muscle memory. Limber to the front, limber to the rear, diminished number drill, you name it. After the battle of Stones River, artillery battery drills drew crowds of off duty spectators. The description sounds a lot like what our annual battery programs are like. In the Army of the Cumberland during the winter & spring of 1863, infantry & artillery made regular patrols to prepare them for the projected June offensive.
Thank you.
 
At <nps.gov> Living History & Historic Weapons Program Policies & Manuals is a treasure trove of information on the training of black powder artillery crews. The training procedures used are very similar to the Civil War era regime. There are some small adjustments that enhance the safety of both gun crews & visitors. However, only a Civil War veteran gunner would know the difference. The is a public document that you are welcome to access.

In the NPS manuals, every crewman has a carefully choreographed set of movements. Step here, turn there, step back... 300 years of artillery drill had been distilled to its essence. There was no wasted movement of any kind. Nothing is for show. At this point it is important to say that the drill you see at reenactments does not reflect Civil War practice. It is a drill that was developed for reenacters in the 1960's. Civil War drill did not include worming after every shot, bending sideways with a hand on one ear, or facing backward, bending double. All of that is a modern affectation that is not an accurate depiction of historic artillery drill. This is not a criticism, it is just a statement of fact.

In the terrific photo at the top of the page, my wife is #2 on the left gun of the smoothbore section & the back of my head is in the center, #1 on the right gun. At Stones River we have a section of 1841 model 6 pdr smoothbore cannon. If you have specific questions, please feel free to ask. If you would like a tour of the cannon collection at the park, I would be happy to meet you there & show you around.

Rhea
 
At <nps.gov> Living History & Historic Weapons Program Policies & Manuals is a treasure trove of information on the training of black powder artillery crews. The training procedures used are very similar to the Civil War era regime. There are some small adjustments that enhance the safety of both gun crews & visitors. However, only a Civil War veteran gunner would know the difference. The is a public document that you are welcome to access.

In the NPS manuals, every crewman has a carefully choreographed set of movements. Step here, turn there, step back... 300 years of artillery drill had been distilled to its essence. There was no wasted movement of any kind. Nothing is for show. At this point it is important to say that the drill you see at reenactments does not reflect Civil War practice. It is a drill that was developed for reenacters in the 1960's. Civil War drill did not include worming after every shot, bending sideways with a hand on one ear, or facing backward, bending double. All of that is a modern affectation that is not an accurate depiction of historic artillery drill. This is not a criticism, it is just a statement of fact.

In the terrific photo at the top of the page, my wife is #2 on the left gun of the smoothbore section & the back of my head is in the center, #1 on the right gun. At Stones River we have a section of 1841 model 6 pdr smoothbore cannon. If you have specific questions, please feel free to ask. If you would like a tour of the cannon collection at the park, I would be happy to meet you there & show you around.

Rhea
Wow, this is great help! Thanks, Rhea. I'd love to come down there and see the cannons. Perhaps I could come down in May once you reopen.
 
Thank you. I'm doing some research for a novel.

How did artillerymen train?
I'm particularly concerned with the 6th USCHA.

You're best bet is to go to original sources.

For an overview, start here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/11th_Regiment_United_States_Colored_Troops_(New)
The 1st Regiment Alabama Siege Artillery (African Descent) was an artillery regiment recruited from African-Americans that served in the Union Army during the American Civil War. The regiment was renamed the 6th US Colored Heavy Artillery. Under the leadership of Major Lionel Booth, the regiment fought at the Battle of Fort Pillow on April 12, 1864. The regiment then became the 7th US Colored Heavy Artillery, and later the 11th United States Colored Infantry.

Note - not to be confused with the other 11th USCT
 
Thank you. I'm doing some research for a novel.

How did artillerymen train? I assume they first spent weeks learning how to march and use a rifle before they got to the big guns. Did they practice the motions of cleaning, loading, and firing without ammo? Did they get to do a lot of live fire training? Did they do a lot of target practice or were they more concerned with their rate of fire leaving aiming to their NCOs and officers?

Any insight you have is appreciated. I'm particularly concerned with the 6th USCHA. I believe the trained at Fort Granger in Memphis. They had two mountain Howitzers, two 6-pound James guns, and eventually two 10-pound Parrot rifles. They were called "heavy artillery," but aren't these field guns?

Thanks,

Cody

All the replies certainly contribute to your question, so I will try to offer some additional information. The field batteries trained extensively unless they were on the campaign trail or in winter camp with inclement weather. They were well supplied, and this too contributed to how often they could train and learn about their respective munitions, operations of their guns, and artillery marksmanship. Eventually, this contributed to the overall success of the Union Army's light artillery in the field. One light battery worth illustrating as a somewhat representative sample of volunteer batteries is Battery B, 1st​ New York Light Artillery, commanded by Captain Rufus D. Pettit. I think they are representative of those batteries that had an experienced artillery officer from the beginning (as not all did). I gather from his letters and other sources that Pettit led his men (and those from other units) in basic training for about 8 weeks in the fall of 1861 at Elmira, New York, where many New York troops were mustered into the U.S. Army. Once they arrived in Washington, D.C., they received artillery training at Camp Barry, a field outside the city designated for that purpose. However, at first the Battery did not have all their own guns yet (a four-gun battery of 10 lb. Parrot rifled guns). I have no definitive proof, but it seems likely that multiple batteries shared the same guns for much of the initial artillery training. But by late November (I need to check Pettit’s letters) I believe they did have their guns. Pettit, a Mexican War veteran who had served in the field artillery, would have played a major role in the artillery training. A good resource and an excellent read is Hard Tack and Coffee: A Soldier’s Life in the Civil War by John Billings, a veteran of a volunteer Massachusetts battery. The pace and nature of their training would have also been subject to when they had enough horses and the long list of equipment for a full battery. Based on one of my great-grandfather’s letters (who served with the Battery), they knew all their assignments and the intricate order of details for operating their guns by late November. His description mirrors the language in the training manual as he describes the duties of each numbered position. But moving, transporting, and maneuvering in the field with horses, was yet another dimension of the training. I suspect much of this did not come until late winter of 1862. My grandfather notes in every letter during this time the amount of “drilling” they do every day. It also appears that there was considerable drilling when weather permitted during winter camps and before the next campaign each subsequent year of the War. With attrition, the veteran batteries were often faced with training new recruits or orienting transfers. Last, I will just emphasize that the artilleryman’s work as a soldier was significantly different than the infantryman’s. The artilleryman’s work required a coordinated effort with all others and their assignments to successfully transport, maneuver, and operate a gun in the field. Billings notes that watching a well-trained battery during drill was a spectator sport that sometimes drew crowds of infantry during late winter camps. How I would love to have seen myself! Good luck with your research.
 
You're best bet is to go to original sources.

For an overview, start here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/11th_Regiment_United_States_Colored_Troops_(New)
The 1st Regiment Alabama Siege Artillery (African Descent) was an artillery regiment recruited from African-Americans that served in the Union Army during the American Civil War. The regiment was renamed the 6th US Colored Heavy Artillery. Under the leadership of Major Lionel Booth, the regiment fought at the Battle of Fort Pillow on April 12, 1864. The regiment then became the 7th US Colored Heavy Artillery, and later the 11th United States Colored Infantry.

Note - not to be confused with the other 11th USCT
Thank you
 
All the replies certainly contribute to your question, so I will try to offer some additional information. The field batteries trained extensively unless they were on the campaign trail or in winter camp with inclement weather. They were well supplied, and this too contributed to how often they could train and learn about their respective munitions, operations of their guns, and artillery marksmanship. Eventually, this contributed to the overall success of the Union Army's light artillery in the field. One light battery worth illustrating as a somewhat representative sample of volunteer batteries is Battery B, 1st​ New York Light Artillery, commanded by Captain Rufus D. Pettit. I think they are representative of those batteries that had an experienced artillery officer from the beginning (as not all did). I gather from his letters and other sources that Pettit led his men (and those from other units) in basic training for about 8 weeks in the fall of 1861 at Elmira, New York, where many New York troops were mustered into the U.S. Army. Once they arrived in Washington, D.C., they received artillery training at Camp Barry, a field outside the city designated for that purpose. However, at first the Battery did not have all their own guns yet (a four-gun battery of 10 lb. Parrot rifled guns). I have no definitive proof, but it seems likely that multiple batteries shared the same guns for much of the initial artillery training. But by late November (I need to check Pettit’s letters) I believe they did have their guns. Pettit, a Mexican War veteran who had served in the field artillery, would have played a major role in the artillery training. A good resource and an excellent read is Hard Tack and Coffee: A Soldier’s Life in the Civil War by John Billings, a veteran of a volunteer Massachusetts battery. The pace and nature of their training would have also been subject to when they had enough horses and the long list of equipment for a full battery. Based on one of my great-grandfather’s letters (who served with the Battery), they knew all their assignments and the intricate order of details for operating their guns by late November. His description mirrors the language in the training manual as he describes the duties of each numbered position. But moving, transporting, and maneuvering in the field with horses, was yet another dimension of the training. I suspect much of this did not come until late winter of 1862. My grandfather notes in every letter during this time the amount of “drilling” they do every day. It also appears that there was considerable drilling when weather permitted during winter camps and before the next campaign each subsequent year of the War. With attrition, the veteran batteries were often faced with training new recruits or orienting transfers. Last, I will just emphasize that the artilleryman’s work as a soldier was significantly different than the infantryman’s. The artilleryman’s work required a coordinated effort with all others and their assignments to successfully transport, maneuver, and operate a gun in the field. Billings notes that watching a well-trained battery during drill was a spectator sport that sometimes drew crowds of infantry during late winter camps. How I would love to have seen myself! Good luck with your research.
Thank you so much. This is great help!
 
All the replies certainly contribute to your question, so I will try to offer some additional information. The field batteries trained extensively unless they were on the campaign trail or in winter camp with inclement weather. They were well supplied, and this too contributed to how often they could train and learn about their respective munitions, operations of their guns, and artillery marksmanship. Eventually, this contributed to the overall success of the Union Army's light artillery in the field. One light battery worth illustrating as a somewhat representative sample of volunteer batteries is Battery B, 1st​ New York Light Artillery, commanded by Captain Rufus D. Pettit. I think they are representative of those batteries that had an experienced artillery officer from the beginning (as not all did). I gather from his letters and other sources that Pettit led his men (and those from other units) in basic training for about 8 weeks in the fall of 1861 at Elmira, New York, where many New York troops were mustered into the U.S. Army. Once they arrived in Washington, D.C., they received artillery training at Camp Barry, a field outside the city designated for that purpose. However, at first the Battery did not have all their own guns yet (a four-gun battery of 10 lb. Parrot rifled guns). I have no definitive proof, but it seems likely that multiple batteries shared the same guns for much of the initial artillery training. But by late November (I need to check Pettit’s letters) I believe they did have their guns. Pettit, a Mexican War veteran who had served in the field artillery, would have played a major role in the artillery training. A good resource and an excellent read is Hard Tack and Coffee: A Soldier’s Life in the Civil War by John Billings, a veteran of a volunteer Massachusetts battery. The pace and nature of their training would have also been subject to when they had enough horses and the long list of equipment for a full battery. Based on one of my great-grandfather’s letters (who served with the Battery), they knew all their assignments and the intricate order of details for operating their guns by late November. His description mirrors the language in the training manual as he describes the duties of each numbered position. But moving, transporting, and maneuvering in the field with horses, was yet another dimension of the training. I suspect much of this did not come until late winter of 1862. My grandfather notes in every letter during this time the amount of “drilling” they do every day. It also appears that there was considerable drilling when weather permitted during winter camps and before the next campaign each subsequent year of the War. With attrition, the veteran batteries were often faced with training new recruits or orienting transfers. Last, I will just emphasize that the artilleryman’s work as a soldier was significantly different than the infantryman’s. The artilleryman’s work required a coordinated effort with all others and their assignments to successfully transport, maneuver, and operate a gun in the field. Billings notes that watching a well-trained battery during drill was a spectator sport that sometimes drew crowds of infantry during late winter camps. How I would love to have seen myself! Good luck with your research.
This is good material. Are your great-grandfather's letters accessible anywhere? You also note an important reason why required continual drilling was required. Many batteries had to replace losses from infantry units they served with. I believe that Battery B 4th US had to replenish from the Iron Brigade, for example. Good teamwork was the primary focus of drill.
 
This is good material. Are your great-grandfather's letters accessible anywhere? You also note an important reason why required continual drilling was required. Many batteries had to replace losses from infantry units they served with. I believe that Battery B 4th US had to replenish from the Iron Brigade, for example. Good teamwork was the primary focus of drill.

You can see them at this link to the University of Iowa, their special collections. Keep in mind that they do have a few dates incorrect, some errors I have discovered since gifting the collection to them several years ago. I believe the letter I mentioned regarding artillery drill is late October or November of 1862 and may have some missing pages. This is the one he lists their specific duties by number as well as their compensation per duty and rank. Good luck!
 
Back
Top