Infantry rifle aiming point

[Wallyfish]

Gettysburg topography forced many infantry charges over open ground. There are many accounts of the Union being in a defensive position, having to wait until the charging infantry came into range. Therefore they had time to think about their Rifle aiming point.

One question that I have always had is how were defensive infantry trained in selecting their human target? Was it every man for themselves and aim as they please? Were defensive infantry men near the center of the charging infantry trained to focus their fire on flag bearers and the color guard of the charging men. Or were they trained to focus their fire on men directly in their front? Under this set of questions, I am assuming that the size of the defensive and offensive infantries are close in number.

Also, how does this aiming strategy change if you use the 1st Minnesota as an example. The 1st Mn was greatly outnumbered, so were they trained to focus their fire at the center of the enemy line?

There are many accounts of flag bearers being struck by multiple balls. Therefore you can assume that the aiming focus was at the flag bearers versus the enemy directly in front of the shooter.

It is rather morbid to talk about selecting a fellow man to shoot, but it is reality. So were they trained to select their targets or in the heat of the battle, every man made their own target decisions without a general strategy? Lastly, did this strategy change for the offensive men selecting targets of the defensive infantry?

 

[datameister]

Gettysburg topography forced many infantry charges over open ground. There are many accounts of the Union being in a defensive position, having to wait until the charging infantry came into range. Therefore they had time to think about their Rifle aiming point.

One question that I have always had is how were defensive infantry trained in selecting their human target? Was it every man for themselves and aim as they please? Were defensive infantry men near the center of the charging infantry trained to focus their fire on flag bearers and the color guard of the charging men. Or were they trained to focus their fire on men directly in their front? Under this set of questions, I am assuming that the size of the defensive and offensive infantries are close in number.

Also, how does this aiming strategy change if you use the 1st Minnesota as an example. The 1st Mn was greatly outnumbered, so were they trained to focus their fire at the center of the enemy line?

There are many accounts of flag bearers being struck by multiple balls. Therefore you can assume that the aiming focus was at the flag bearers versus the enemy directly in front of the shooter.

It is rather morbid to talk about selecting a fellow man to shoot, but it is reality. So were they trained to select their targets or in the heat of the battle, every man made their own target decisions without a general strategy? Lastly, did this strategy change for the offensive men selecting targets of the defensive infantry?

Great questions. I think I have a resource or two around here to quote, but in lieu of that it is my understanding of modern scholarship that marksmanship training or rather quality training was a rare commodity. In fact, it was no more advanced than in the smoothbore days, just point and shoot. One can find a number of examples of leaders exhorting the men to "aim low" etc. This was in part to the close engagement ranges, negating the real benefit of rifled muskets, where the trajectory of the rifled bullet would result in firing high.

It is interesting to watch trained individuals consistently hit targets with a Springfield at 100 yards from a standing position. Now, shoot at or startle in some manner the same individual while he is dehydrated, hungry, covered in ticks, mosquito bites, on the verge of a bout of dysentery and then compare the scores.

Now, that is a broad generalization and there certainly are examples of selecting a specific target. The examples at Gettysburg that stand out are the mass retribution on Paddy O'Rourke's killer and the hunting down of the Reb that mortally wounded Colonel Cross.

 

[JOHN42768]

With armament being equal, single shot to single shot and not repeaters. I would think the thickest most forward portion of the attacking line to be my target. If repeaters were involved, I would go after them first. I'm sure a lot of fire would be on the flag bearer. Aiming low would also produce the most damage due to injuries more then kill shots and tying others up in helping the wounded out of line of fire.

 

[Coonewah Creek]

One question that I have always had is how were defensive infantry trained in selecting their human target? Was it every man for themselves and aim as they please? Were defensive infantry men near the center of the charging infantry trained to focus their fire on flag bearers and the color guard of the charging men. Or were they trained to focus their fire on men directly in their front? Under this set of questions, I am assuming that the size of the defensive and offensive infantries are close in number.

Although probably not directly addressing the question at hand, I always liked the account by Sam Watkins in his "CO. AYTCH" memoir. I believe this quote came after the battle of Cheat Mountain, one of the earliest fights, but probably holds true for later also:

"After the fighting was over, where, O where, was all the fine rigging heretofore on our officers? They could not be seen. Corporals, sergeants, lieutenants, captains, all had torn all the fine lace off their clothing. I noticed that at the time and was surprised and hurt. I asked several of them why they had torn off the insignia of their rank, and they always answered, "Humph, you think that I was going to be a target for the Yankees to shoot at?" You see, this was our first battle, and the officers had not found out that minnie as well as cannon balls were blind; that they had no eyes and could not see. They thought that the balls would hunt for them and not hurt the privates. I always shot at privates. It was they that did the shooting and killing, and if I could kill or wound a private, why, my chances were so much the better. I always looked upon officers as harmless personages.... If I shot at an officer, it was at long range, but when we got down to close quarters I always tried to kill those that were trying to kill me. [emphasis added]"