Western Reserve Volunteer
Sergeant
- Joined
- May 12, 2018
“But the rule requiring limbers and caissons to face the enemy should only be departed from while firing in retreat.”
“Two methods have been adopted for the formations in battery to the front: one requiring the pieces to be thrown forward, the other requiring the caissons to be thrown to the rear. The first method is equally adapted to light and heavy batteries. By this method the pieces and caissons are rapidly separated; and the commands may be given while the battery is moving, so as to leave the caissons at their proper distance in rear of the line on which the pieces are to form, The second method is not adapted to heavy batteries, on account of the difficulty of turning the pieces by hand. But with light pieces it is advantageous when the battery is already formed upon the line of battle, or when the column which is to be formed into battery is very near that line. In horse artillery the first method of coming into action is considered the best; for, while the cannoneers are dismounting, the pieces are moved forward and wheeled about by the horses, so that nothing remains for the cannoneers but to unlimber and commence firing.”
-From French’s Field Artillery Tactics Manual, 1864
It seems to me these statements are somewhat contradictory, but it would appear that one would only have the limber pole away from the enemy when: 1. You were firing whilst retiring 2. Your artillery position was on the line of battle ], 3. You were horse artillery , or 4. You were a siege artillery.
So it seems to be a “not recommended, but sometime necessary” practice based on the context of the guns use. The way the manual is written is confusing and leaves just enough leeway that I think a reasonable commander could follow either style of unlimbering his guns and be able to justify it's use.
“Two methods have been adopted for the formations in battery to the front: one requiring the pieces to be thrown forward, the other requiring the caissons to be thrown to the rear. The first method is equally adapted to light and heavy batteries. By this method the pieces and caissons are rapidly separated; and the commands may be given while the battery is moving, so as to leave the caissons at their proper distance in rear of the line on which the pieces are to form, The second method is not adapted to heavy batteries, on account of the difficulty of turning the pieces by hand. But with light pieces it is advantageous when the battery is already formed upon the line of battle, or when the column which is to be formed into battery is very near that line. In horse artillery the first method of coming into action is considered the best; for, while the cannoneers are dismounting, the pieces are moved forward and wheeled about by the horses, so that nothing remains for the cannoneers but to unlimber and commence firing.”
-From French’s Field Artillery Tactics Manual, 1864
It seems to me these statements are somewhat contradictory, but it would appear that one would only have the limber pole away from the enemy when: 1. You were firing whilst retiring 2. Your artillery position was on the line of battle ], 3. You were horse artillery , or 4. You were a siege artillery.
So it seems to be a “not recommended, but sometime necessary” practice based on the context of the guns use. The way the manual is written is confusing and leaves just enough leeway that I think a reasonable commander could follow either style of unlimbering his guns and be able to justify it's use.