Manassas 1861
Sergeant
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2023
- Location
- Somewhere on Henry Hudson's river.
What drill manual did the IronBrigade use? I know they didn't use caseys
-
Welcome to CivilWarTalk, a forum about the American Civil War! - Join today! It's fast, simple, and FREE!
Iron Brigade Drill
- Thread starter Manassas 1861
- Start date
RedRover
1st Lieutenant
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2019
Some of the commands drilled with Scott's infantry and Hardee's light infantry tactics in their first encampments in mid-1861.
Besides the original editions, there were primers printed for Wisconsin volunteers, like that by Mr. Chandler.
By July, 1861 one of the badgers noted that like the bulk of the troops in Virginia, they had abandoned Scott's infantry tactics for Hardee's rifle and light infantry tactics: "We are drilling Hardee altogether, every movement being made in double quick time, a change which is liked very much."
But evidently some of the units continued employing some of the old manual of arms for infantry (Scott's) as they were principally armed with muskets, while Hardee's drill book (1855, etc.) had only manual of arms for the new rifle (two band, sword bayonet).
Casey's tactics for all foot troops, official from August, 1862, had a single manual of arms, basically Hardee's, for rifles or rifle-muskets, etc., with very slight variation depending upon the arm...
But evidently some of the Iron brigade units didn't bother to perfect Casey's manual of arms until early 1864 when directly ordered to do so.
Head Quarters Ist Brigade 1st Div 1st A.C.
January 28th 1864
General Orders No. 8 ...............
There is a want of uniformity in the practice of the several Regiments of this Brig. in the manner of executing the following movements: Coming to a "Parade Rest; fixing and bayonets. Some of the troops execute these movements according to Scott while others execute them according to Casey. The latter having been recognized by the War Department as authority of course it is not optional with officers which system is to be adopted.
The only correct system because the only recognized one is Casey
Page 226, Ist Vol. Casey will be found the instructions for Parade Rest.
Page 50 Ist Vol. Casey will be found the instructions for fixing bayonets and on page 63. the instructions for unfixing bayonets.
Thereafter on Grand Guard Mounting and on Inspections the troops will be required to execute the above movements according to the instructions prescribed by Casey.
By Comd. of Henry A. Morrow
Col. Comdg Brigade
Here's a photo of some of the 7th Wisconsin at "Shoulder arms" as given by Scott's infantry tactics.
Besides the original editions, there were primers printed for Wisconsin volunteers, like that by Mr. Chandler.
By July, 1861 one of the badgers noted that like the bulk of the troops in Virginia, they had abandoned Scott's infantry tactics for Hardee's rifle and light infantry tactics: "We are drilling Hardee altogether, every movement being made in double quick time, a change which is liked very much."
But evidently some of the units continued employing some of the old manual of arms for infantry (Scott's) as they were principally armed with muskets, while Hardee's drill book (1855, etc.) had only manual of arms for the new rifle (two band, sword bayonet).
Casey's tactics for all foot troops, official from August, 1862, had a single manual of arms, basically Hardee's, for rifles or rifle-muskets, etc., with very slight variation depending upon the arm...
But evidently some of the Iron brigade units didn't bother to perfect Casey's manual of arms until early 1864 when directly ordered to do so.
Head Quarters Ist Brigade 1st Div 1st A.C.
January 28th 1864
General Orders No. 8 ...............
There is a want of uniformity in the practice of the several Regiments of this Brig. in the manner of executing the following movements: Coming to a "Parade Rest; fixing and bayonets. Some of the troops execute these movements according to Scott while others execute them according to Casey. The latter having been recognized by the War Department as authority of course it is not optional with officers which system is to be adopted.
The only correct system because the only recognized one is Casey
Page 226, Ist Vol. Casey will be found the instructions for Parade Rest.
Page 50 Ist Vol. Casey will be found the instructions for fixing bayonets and on page 63. the instructions for unfixing bayonets.
Thereafter on Grand Guard Mounting and on Inspections the troops will be required to execute the above movements according to the instructions prescribed by Casey.
By Comd. of Henry A. Morrow
Col. Comdg Brigade
Here's a photo of some of the 7th Wisconsin at "Shoulder arms" as given by Scott's infantry tactics.
Last edited:
Marc Storch
Private
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2022
I wrote this quite a while ago but it might answer some of your questions.
While it is relatively easy to provide firm documentation as to the original drill manuals used by the Second Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry, it is far more difficult to authoritatively speak as to what drill manual or manuals were used later in the war. In an attempt to review the known sources, it can be readily seen that while one is able to surmise several possible solutions to the above question, in the end the only answer is that there is yet no definitive answer.
When the Second Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry was formed in May 1861, the ten companies who arrived at Camp Randall in Madison Wisconsin varied from well drilled militia companies sporting their own uniforms to untrained groups of men in civilian clothing. While some of the pre-existing companies had drilled with some manual, there is no indication for certain what they might have been. 1
Interestingly enough, to create regularity in the Wisconsin troops forming at Camp Randall, General Rufus King declared that all regiments then forming in the capitol should use the "Infantry Tactics, compiled from Scott and Hardee, for the use of Wisconsin Volunteers, by R. Chandler." This manual was not of Federal Government creation but of local origin and combined elements of both popular manuals. Robert Chandler was then on General King's staff, and must have created the combined manual at his suggestion. Thus the troops used neither one nor the other of the two popular manuals at first, but a combination of both. The manual Chandler prepared was only of use at the company level, but at the time that probably seemed the most critical need. To further muddy the water of what manual was preferred, the author has in his possession a copy of the U.S. Infantry Tactics, 1861 with the signature of "W. S. M. Abbott, Camp Randall, Madison, Wisconsin, May 30 1861" in its cover. Abbot was a lieutenant in Company G of the Second. Why if the unit was directed to use Chandler's manual Abbot would then buy the other is unknown. With whatever guidance this training gave, the Second was sent off to Washington D.C. 2
After the debacle of First Bull Run, the Second found itself again under the direction of General King. This time the brigade was composed of (eventually) three Wisconsin units, the Second, Sixth and Seventh, and the Nineteenth Indiana. Perhaps to ensure that all four regiments would work in concert, on August 1, 1861 King issued General Order No. 1. The brigade was encamped at Camp Kalorama near Washington when the order was published which stated "The system of Infantry Tactics in two Volumes prepared under the direction of the War Department & approved May 1, 1861 will be adopted by the several regiments in this Brigade…" This two volume manual was the U.S. Infantry & Rifle Tactics. The order also stated one deviation from the above manual, which altered the method of loading from that for two banded muskets to those with three bands. The description given was similar to then updated versions of Hardee's which were appearing and of course made sense for all troops were equipped with three band rifles. 3
There appears a month later in the orders of the Second Wisconsin a somewhat contradictory edict to the previous directive. On September 1, 1861 Regimental Order No. 21 was posted stating "There will be a battalion drill tomorrow commencing at 15 minutes past 4 P.M. and continuing one hour and a half, in accordance with Hardee's Tactics." It is important to note that this order is for battalion drill, not company drill. Thus it does not confirm that Scott's drill or any other drill was supplanted for the use by the companies of the brigade, but clearly indicates that Hardee's (or the U.S. Infantry & Rifle Tactics manual, since the names were sometimes used interchangeably) was to be used at the battalion level. Providing even more possible obscurity to what was happening is the fact that there is no complete regimental order book for the Second Wisconsin. The number of an order still extant prior to this one is No. 14, dated Aug. 22, 1861, and the next one that follows it is No. 26, dated Sept. 15, 1861. What the missing orders state regarding drill is sadly unknown. 4
On October 9th, 1861 a soldier of Company C of the 7th wrote home "We were drilled in Scott's Heavy Infantry at Madison. As soon as we got to Washington they put us into Hardee's Light Infantry and Skirmishing." Again there is no clarification as to what part of the drill, all or only company and above, is being referenced. 5
Lucius Fairchild, then Lt. Colonel of the Second Wisconsin further clouds the issue by writing home on October 29th, 1861 that officers will be examined as to their proficiency in the drill manuals. Writing to his brother Cassius he stated "That examination as I understand it is for a Field officer the school of the soldier - the school of the Battalion, & evolutions of the line - the latter is the 3rd vol. of Scott's tactics." He goes on to note that the regiments have been drilling in the line and as he does not note that another manual is being used, one could surmise it was the 3rd volume of Scott's that was in use. Thus if soldiers are commenting that Scott's was used but then Hardee's was, and Fairchild notes the use of Scott's for higher formation drill, is it correct to assume Hardee's was used for only company drill? 6
There exists at the State Historical Society a copy of Scott's, with the inscription "J. Mansfield, Lt. Col., 2nd W.V., 5th A.C." While the notes inside the manual are almost certainly there from his time as Captain of Company G, he officially assumed the post of Lt. Colonel of the regiment in February of 1864. He had however commanded the regiment since Colonel Lucius Fairchild was wounded on July 1, 1863. Finally, the 5th Corps was only officially designated in March 1864. Thus for him to sign it in that manner would require that it was procured after that date. Since the veteran furloughs were also occurring at this time, it is possible that he sent it home then, or that it came back after he returned to Wisconsin from Confederate prison. In either case, it serves to prove he owned and used the manual at some point, but fails to determine at what point.
The same may be said of the order given by Colonel Morrow of the 24th Michigan while he was commanding the brigade. Stating that:
Head Quarters 1st Brigade 1st Div 1st A.C.
January 28th 1864
General Orders No. 8 ...............
There is a want of uniformity in the practice of the several Regiments of this Brig. in
the manner of executing the following movements: Coming to a "Parade Rest; fixing
and bayonets. Some of the troops execute these movements according to Scott while
others execute them according to Casey. The latter having been recognized by the
War Department as authority of course it is not optional with officers which system is
to be adopted.
The only correct system because the only recognized one is Casey
Page 226, 1st Vol. Casey will be found the instructions for Parade Rest.
Page 50 1st Vol. Casey will be found the instructions for fixing bayonets and on page
63. the instructions for unfixing bayonets.
Thereafter on Grand Guard Mounting and on Inspections the troops will be required
to execute the above movements according to the instructions prescribed by Casey.
This only serves to tell us that "some of the troops" use Scott's, while others use Hardee's. It does not tell which ones in the brigade used which. While one could assume that at least some of the Wisconsin regiments used Hardee's, it is impossible to be sure. In addition, it is interesting that when Morrow states "The latter having been recognized by the War Department as authority of course it is not optional with officers which system is to be adopted." If Morrow felt it necessary to state that Casey's must be followed for "parade rest" then if regiments were using Scott's drill for other movements would he not have ordered them to cease the use of those here too? Is this one incident of parade rest the last remaining vestige of Scott's use in the brigade perhaps? 7
From the above listed references to drill, what can we then safely assume regarding the drill of the Second, and in some cases, the other regiments of the Iron Brigade? From the gathering of the ten companies of the Second until the end of May in 1861 Scott's tactics were in use. After that date, those done by Chandler were in use until August/September of 1861. After that date, some variations were used, perhaps one volume of one set of tactics, and some other of yet another author's. With this lack of firm documentation and potential for various interpretations, it is impossible to state without some hesitation one and only one conclusion. Thus until more information appears, the safest conclusion is that there is no concrete answer!
Notes:
For an example of this, at the La Crosse Historical Society there is the Scott's manual belonging to Wilson Colwell. Unfortunately there is no indication if he bought this when he was captain of the La Crosse Light Guards prior to the war, or sometime after the war started. Since both Scott's and Hardee's manuals were publish prior to the war either could have been used by the pre-war militia companies.
A copy of the slim manual is in the possession of the State Historical Society of Wisconsin. The U.S. Infantry Tactics Manual is in the collection of Marc and Beth Storch.
State Historical Society of Wisconsin, Series 1200, boxes pertaining to the 6th Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry.
State Historical Society of Wisconsin, Series 1200, boxes pertaining to the 2nd Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry.
Grant County Witness, October 17, 1861.
Letter dated Oct. 29, 1861, Fairchild Papers, State Historical Society of Wisconsin.
State Historical Society of Wisconsin, Series 1200, boxes pertaining to the 6th Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry.
While it is relatively easy to provide firm documentation as to the original drill manuals used by the Second Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry, it is far more difficult to authoritatively speak as to what drill manual or manuals were used later in the war. In an attempt to review the known sources, it can be readily seen that while one is able to surmise several possible solutions to the above question, in the end the only answer is that there is yet no definitive answer.
When the Second Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry was formed in May 1861, the ten companies who arrived at Camp Randall in Madison Wisconsin varied from well drilled militia companies sporting their own uniforms to untrained groups of men in civilian clothing. While some of the pre-existing companies had drilled with some manual, there is no indication for certain what they might have been. 1
Interestingly enough, to create regularity in the Wisconsin troops forming at Camp Randall, General Rufus King declared that all regiments then forming in the capitol should use the "Infantry Tactics, compiled from Scott and Hardee, for the use of Wisconsin Volunteers, by R. Chandler." This manual was not of Federal Government creation but of local origin and combined elements of both popular manuals. Robert Chandler was then on General King's staff, and must have created the combined manual at his suggestion. Thus the troops used neither one nor the other of the two popular manuals at first, but a combination of both. The manual Chandler prepared was only of use at the company level, but at the time that probably seemed the most critical need. To further muddy the water of what manual was preferred, the author has in his possession a copy of the U.S. Infantry Tactics, 1861 with the signature of "W. S. M. Abbott, Camp Randall, Madison, Wisconsin, May 30 1861" in its cover. Abbot was a lieutenant in Company G of the Second. Why if the unit was directed to use Chandler's manual Abbot would then buy the other is unknown. With whatever guidance this training gave, the Second was sent off to Washington D.C. 2
After the debacle of First Bull Run, the Second found itself again under the direction of General King. This time the brigade was composed of (eventually) three Wisconsin units, the Second, Sixth and Seventh, and the Nineteenth Indiana. Perhaps to ensure that all four regiments would work in concert, on August 1, 1861 King issued General Order No. 1. The brigade was encamped at Camp Kalorama near Washington when the order was published which stated "The system of Infantry Tactics in two Volumes prepared under the direction of the War Department & approved May 1, 1861 will be adopted by the several regiments in this Brigade…" This two volume manual was the U.S. Infantry & Rifle Tactics. The order also stated one deviation from the above manual, which altered the method of loading from that for two banded muskets to those with three bands. The description given was similar to then updated versions of Hardee's which were appearing and of course made sense for all troops were equipped with three band rifles. 3
There appears a month later in the orders of the Second Wisconsin a somewhat contradictory edict to the previous directive. On September 1, 1861 Regimental Order No. 21 was posted stating "There will be a battalion drill tomorrow commencing at 15 minutes past 4 P.M. and continuing one hour and a half, in accordance with Hardee's Tactics." It is important to note that this order is for battalion drill, not company drill. Thus it does not confirm that Scott's drill or any other drill was supplanted for the use by the companies of the brigade, but clearly indicates that Hardee's (or the U.S. Infantry & Rifle Tactics manual, since the names were sometimes used interchangeably) was to be used at the battalion level. Providing even more possible obscurity to what was happening is the fact that there is no complete regimental order book for the Second Wisconsin. The number of an order still extant prior to this one is No. 14, dated Aug. 22, 1861, and the next one that follows it is No. 26, dated Sept. 15, 1861. What the missing orders state regarding drill is sadly unknown. 4
On October 9th, 1861 a soldier of Company C of the 7th wrote home "We were drilled in Scott's Heavy Infantry at Madison. As soon as we got to Washington they put us into Hardee's Light Infantry and Skirmishing." Again there is no clarification as to what part of the drill, all or only company and above, is being referenced. 5
Lucius Fairchild, then Lt. Colonel of the Second Wisconsin further clouds the issue by writing home on October 29th, 1861 that officers will be examined as to their proficiency in the drill manuals. Writing to his brother Cassius he stated "That examination as I understand it is for a Field officer the school of the soldier - the school of the Battalion, & evolutions of the line - the latter is the 3rd vol. of Scott's tactics." He goes on to note that the regiments have been drilling in the line and as he does not note that another manual is being used, one could surmise it was the 3rd volume of Scott's that was in use. Thus if soldiers are commenting that Scott's was used but then Hardee's was, and Fairchild notes the use of Scott's for higher formation drill, is it correct to assume Hardee's was used for only company drill? 6
There exists at the State Historical Society a copy of Scott's, with the inscription "J. Mansfield, Lt. Col., 2nd W.V., 5th A.C." While the notes inside the manual are almost certainly there from his time as Captain of Company G, he officially assumed the post of Lt. Colonel of the regiment in February of 1864. He had however commanded the regiment since Colonel Lucius Fairchild was wounded on July 1, 1863. Finally, the 5th Corps was only officially designated in March 1864. Thus for him to sign it in that manner would require that it was procured after that date. Since the veteran furloughs were also occurring at this time, it is possible that he sent it home then, or that it came back after he returned to Wisconsin from Confederate prison. In either case, it serves to prove he owned and used the manual at some point, but fails to determine at what point.
The same may be said of the order given by Colonel Morrow of the 24th Michigan while he was commanding the brigade. Stating that:
Head Quarters 1st Brigade 1st Div 1st A.C.
January 28th 1864
General Orders No. 8 ...............
There is a want of uniformity in the practice of the several Regiments of this Brig. in
the manner of executing the following movements: Coming to a "Parade Rest; fixing
and bayonets. Some of the troops execute these movements according to Scott while
others execute them according to Casey. The latter having been recognized by the
War Department as authority of course it is not optional with officers which system is
to be adopted.
The only correct system because the only recognized one is Casey
Page 226, 1st Vol. Casey will be found the instructions for Parade Rest.
Page 50 1st Vol. Casey will be found the instructions for fixing bayonets and on page
63. the instructions for unfixing bayonets.
Thereafter on Grand Guard Mounting and on Inspections the troops will be required
to execute the above movements according to the instructions prescribed by Casey.
This only serves to tell us that "some of the troops" use Scott's, while others use Hardee's. It does not tell which ones in the brigade used which. While one could assume that at least some of the Wisconsin regiments used Hardee's, it is impossible to be sure. In addition, it is interesting that when Morrow states "The latter having been recognized by the War Department as authority of course it is not optional with officers which system is to be adopted." If Morrow felt it necessary to state that Casey's must be followed for "parade rest" then if regiments were using Scott's drill for other movements would he not have ordered them to cease the use of those here too? Is this one incident of parade rest the last remaining vestige of Scott's use in the brigade perhaps? 7
From the above listed references to drill, what can we then safely assume regarding the drill of the Second, and in some cases, the other regiments of the Iron Brigade? From the gathering of the ten companies of the Second until the end of May in 1861 Scott's tactics were in use. After that date, those done by Chandler were in use until August/September of 1861. After that date, some variations were used, perhaps one volume of one set of tactics, and some other of yet another author's. With this lack of firm documentation and potential for various interpretations, it is impossible to state without some hesitation one and only one conclusion. Thus until more information appears, the safest conclusion is that there is no concrete answer!
Notes:
For an example of this, at the La Crosse Historical Society there is the Scott's manual belonging to Wilson Colwell. Unfortunately there is no indication if he bought this when he was captain of the La Crosse Light Guards prior to the war, or sometime after the war started. Since both Scott's and Hardee's manuals were publish prior to the war either could have been used by the pre-war militia companies.
A copy of the slim manual is in the possession of the State Historical Society of Wisconsin. The U.S. Infantry Tactics Manual is in the collection of Marc and Beth Storch.
State Historical Society of Wisconsin, Series 1200, boxes pertaining to the 6th Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry.
State Historical Society of Wisconsin, Series 1200, boxes pertaining to the 2nd Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry.
Grant County Witness, October 17, 1861.
Letter dated Oct. 29, 1861, Fairchild Papers, State Historical Society of Wisconsin.
State Historical Society of Wisconsin, Series 1200, boxes pertaining to the 6th Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry.
thomas aagaard
Captain
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2013
- Location
- Denmark
I had decided to take a break from the forum, but got a mail but I became a wear of this topic...
---
First of all we need to divide what manual of arms was used and what manual for orders and evolutions was used.
When we look at the Wisconsin units they appear to have used Chandlers book at the start of the war.
What is clear to me is that Chandler made the book quickly and the goal was to provide something that could be used for what we today would call basic training.
It is a small book of only 77 numbered pages. It covers the school of the soldier and the company. but no battalion level.
And a lot of what we find in Scott/Hardee/Casey is missing. (no fire by rank or by file and marching is only done with a 28" step at 90 steps pr. min So common time. Do doubling when marching by the flank)
But again it only have 77 numbered pages, so things had to be cut.
The language in the drill is based on Scotts. With the slower way of giving orders. that is, it use more words.
"1. By the right flank. "right face"
where Hardee/Casey got "1.Squad. 2. right Face".
And the way of doing things is mostly from scots.
But it do use a manual of arms that is a mix. It is load in nine times. It got no "cast about" as we see in the manual of arms for muskets. It use the "load position" between the feet. But shoulder arms is still done in the left hand, like with smoothbore muskets.
That is was quickly made can be seen in two ways.
1. The one I got scan of is marked Lt Strong, 5th Wisconsin. July 11th 1861. So from the time the war breaks out to this officer having a copy is short.
Second evidence it that is got a number of errors.
Load in nine times go 1.Load 2.Handle cartridge 2.Tear Cartridge 4.carge cartridge...
And at one point it mention a middle rank. When the rest of the book is clearly about a two rank formation.
As mentioned the text is based on Scotts and this is what we today would call a copy-past error.
----
What did they do later?
I would argue that they then ended up using a mix.
With big parts of the school of the soldier company missing and no school of the battalion they would have had to implement elements from Scotts or Hardees since they are missing critical evolutions and ways of giving fire.
And since the official manual was the 1861 US infantry tactics. I would argue that they used that one.
That is basically Hardees's 1855 book, with his name removed and the manual of arms for muskets added. So if a unit was armed with smoothbores they where to use that manual of arms for muskets.
So when a soldier/officer mention drilling by hardee or scott, we actually don't know if they are talking about the orders and evolutions or the manual of arms.
Gilhams manual that ended up being used by many Virginia units, is basically Hardee's evolutions and orders and the manual of arms as found in Scotts.
So the photo of the 7th Wis would look the same, no matter if they are using Chandlers, Scotts or US1861. Or a mix.
Then by late 1862 we get Casey's and I will argue that they end up using a mix.
Here I agree with Marc Storch. Morrow's order tell us just as much by what it don't mention as what it do mention.
If they had stuck with their shoulder arms in the left hand, Iam sure he would also have been angry about that.
If they had still been moving only at common time, and not doubled up when marching by the flank he would have mentioned it.
And surely they have at some point used "fire by file"
Also, the version of fix and unfix bayonets from the manual of arms for muskets is simply superior to the one from the rifle manual of arms... if armed with a full length musket and not a short rifle.
For me there is little difference, but for a short guy there is a big difference. And when we compare the 1855 Hardee and version he publish for CSA use, fix/unfix bayonets is one of the few changes he makes.
He go back to the version we find in the manual of arms for muskets.
So Hardee agree with me that it is superior with full length muskets.
If the soldiers had first learned one way to do it... then they would not have liked to be ordered to retrained to a way that was worse. And as the battalion commander, why would you actually care how the men do it, as long as it work and they do it in the same way?
So to me it makes perfect sense that they have stuck with the way it is descripted in Chandlers. And with Morrow clearly not knowing about this small drill book, he call it Scotts.
The "Parade Rest" issue, is not really a drill book issue but the fact that there was two official ways to do it.
One found in the army regulations and another one in the description on how to relive sentries.
(and then a lot of reenactors invented their own version that is in wide use in mainstream units)
Hope it help with the Wisconsin units. What the rest did I got no idea.
-------------------
If you like to read Chandlers my scan can be found here:
If you like it in a printed version it can be found her:
It is a modern print and the size is not entirely correct. But amazon simply don't supporting printing books as small as the original is.
For the record, I do earn like 3$ or something on the printed version...
But I spend many hours copying the text into word, dealing with all the mistakes the acrobat text recognition made... and then recreating the layout, including the original mistakes... and it took like 5 or 6 text prints to get is where it is now.
That money have covered my expense on supporting "civil war digest" on patreon.
---
First of all we need to divide what manual of arms was used and what manual for orders and evolutions was used.
When we look at the Wisconsin units they appear to have used Chandlers book at the start of the war.
What is clear to me is that Chandler made the book quickly and the goal was to provide something that could be used for what we today would call basic training.
It is a small book of only 77 numbered pages. It covers the school of the soldier and the company. but no battalion level.
And a lot of what we find in Scott/Hardee/Casey is missing. (no fire by rank or by file and marching is only done with a 28" step at 90 steps pr. min So common time. Do doubling when marching by the flank)
But again it only have 77 numbered pages, so things had to be cut.
The language in the drill is based on Scotts. With the slower way of giving orders. that is, it use more words.
"1. By the right flank. "right face"
where Hardee/Casey got "1.Squad. 2. right Face".
And the way of doing things is mostly from scots.
But it do use a manual of arms that is a mix. It is load in nine times. It got no "cast about" as we see in the manual of arms for muskets. It use the "load position" between the feet. But shoulder arms is still done in the left hand, like with smoothbore muskets.
That is was quickly made can be seen in two ways.
1. The one I got scan of is marked Lt Strong, 5th Wisconsin. July 11th 1861. So from the time the war breaks out to this officer having a copy is short.
Second evidence it that is got a number of errors.
Load in nine times go 1.Load 2.Handle cartridge 2.Tear Cartridge 4.carge cartridge...
And at one point it mention a middle rank. When the rest of the book is clearly about a two rank formation.
As mentioned the text is based on Scotts and this is what we today would call a copy-past error.
----
What did they do later?
I would argue that they then ended up using a mix.
With big parts of the school of the soldier company missing and no school of the battalion they would have had to implement elements from Scotts or Hardees since they are missing critical evolutions and ways of giving fire.
And since the official manual was the 1861 US infantry tactics. I would argue that they used that one.
That is basically Hardees's 1855 book, with his name removed and the manual of arms for muskets added. So if a unit was armed with smoothbores they where to use that manual of arms for muskets.
So when a soldier/officer mention drilling by hardee or scott, we actually don't know if they are talking about the orders and evolutions or the manual of arms.
Gilhams manual that ended up being used by many Virginia units, is basically Hardee's evolutions and orders and the manual of arms as found in Scotts.
So the photo of the 7th Wis would look the same, no matter if they are using Chandlers, Scotts or US1861. Or a mix.
Then by late 1862 we get Casey's and I will argue that they end up using a mix.
Here I agree with Marc Storch. Morrow's order tell us just as much by what it don't mention as what it do mention.
If they had stuck with their shoulder arms in the left hand, Iam sure he would also have been angry about that.
If they had still been moving only at common time, and not doubled up when marching by the flank he would have mentioned it.
And surely they have at some point used "fire by file"
Also, the version of fix and unfix bayonets from the manual of arms for muskets is simply superior to the one from the rifle manual of arms... if armed with a full length musket and not a short rifle.
For me there is little difference, but for a short guy there is a big difference. And when we compare the 1855 Hardee and version he publish for CSA use, fix/unfix bayonets is one of the few changes he makes.
He go back to the version we find in the manual of arms for muskets.
So Hardee agree with me that it is superior with full length muskets.
If the soldiers had first learned one way to do it... then they would not have liked to be ordered to retrained to a way that was worse. And as the battalion commander, why would you actually care how the men do it, as long as it work and they do it in the same way?
So to me it makes perfect sense that they have stuck with the way it is descripted in Chandlers. And with Morrow clearly not knowing about this small drill book, he call it Scotts.
The "Parade Rest" issue, is not really a drill book issue but the fact that there was two official ways to do it.
One found in the army regulations and another one in the description on how to relive sentries.
(and then a lot of reenactors invented their own version that is in wide use in mainstream units)
Hope it help with the Wisconsin units. What the rest did I got no idea.
-------------------
If you like to read Chandlers my scan can be found here:
If you like it in a printed version it can be found her:
Infantry Tactics compiled from Scott and Hardee For the use of Wisconsin Volunteers: Pocket Size: Chandler, Robert, Hardee, William Joseph, Scott, Winfield: 9798370042751: Amazon.com: Books
Infantry Tactics compiled from Scott and Hardee For the use of Wisconsin Volunteers: Pocket Size [Chandler, Robert, Hardee, William Joseph, Scott, Winfield] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Infantry Tactics compiled from Scott and Hardee For the use of Wisconsin Volunteers...
www.amazon.com
It is a modern print and the size is not entirely correct. But amazon simply don't supporting printing books as small as the original is.
For the record, I do earn like 3$ or something on the printed version...
But I spend many hours copying the text into word, dealing with all the mistakes the acrobat text recognition made... and then recreating the layout, including the original mistakes... and it took like 5 or 6 text prints to get is where it is now.
That money have covered my expense on supporting "civil war digest" on patreon.
thomas aagaard
Captain
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2013
- Location
- Denmark
Hardee's two volumes only cover the soldier (including manual of arms), company and battalion.
Until Casey's in late 1862 the 3rd volume of Scotts was the official manual for the evolutions of a brigade.
So it again point to that a field officer in a Wisconsin unit might actually be in "contact" with 3 manuals.
The manual of arms from chandlers and some elements of the soldeir and the company schools.
The rest of the evolutions for soldier, the company and battalion from US 1861 (Hardee's)
and then the brigade is using Scotts evolution of the line.
This show why Caseys' was a big improvement. Even if it changed little for the ordinary soldier if he was already using the the manual of arms for rifles... it was a big standardization for the field officers.
Marc Storch
Private
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2022
just to muddy the water of what manual was preferred, we have in our possession a copy of the "U.S. Infantry Tactics, for the instruction, exercise, and maneuvers of the United States infantry, including infantry of the line, light infantry, and riflemen. Prepared under the direction of the War department, and authorized and adopted by the secretary of war, May 1, 1861." with the signature of "W.S.M. Abbott, Camp Randall, Madison, Wisconsin, May 30 1861" in its cover. Abbot was a lieutenant in Company G of the Second Wisconsin Infantry. If the unit was directed to use Chandler's manual, then why would Abbot then buy the other is unknown. This volume does however include battalion level drill in it. Likewise, we possess a copy of Volume III of Scott's "Infantry Tactics" which belonged to A.J. Langworthy of Co. K (Original) of the Second. This volume also covers battalion drill. It could be surmised that these officers were acquiring these volumes to cover the evolutions that Chandler's manual did not. We also have found references to "Hardee's" and the U.S. Infantry Tactics" manuals being used interchangeably as noted, so it is indeed a confusing issue.
Trooper "D"
Sergeant Major
- Joined
- May 20, 2018
"Carry Arms my wayward son.
They'll be peace when you are done.
Lay your weary head to rest.
Don't you cry no more. NO!"
Similar threads
Similar threads
- Question
- Learn About Us
- ►About CivilWarTalk
- ►Contact the Webmaster
- ►Meet the Staff
- ►Link to CivilWarTalk
- Join Our Community
- ►Register
- ►Browse Forums
- ►View Today's Discussions
- ►Search the Forum
- Get Help
- ►FAQ
- ►Student Guide
- ►Forum Rules & Etiquette
- ►Copyright / DMCA
Bringing the