Union artillery and overhead fire

[ianr38]

Good evening.
This is my first post to this forum. Living in the UK I regret that I have never had the chance so far to visit the battlefield to see for myself, but one aspect of the film of Gettysburg has always puzzled me. During the final confederate attack we are shown the union artillery firing over their infantry who are crouching behind the stone wall. This all makes for a great film, but how did it happen in reality? As the confederate infantry advanced closer and the union infantry stood up for how long could the artillery have continued firing without risking hitting their own men? The clearance shown on the film seems very small. Were there any set regulations regarding how to conduct such overhead fire safely?
Many thanks
Regards
Ian R

 

[redbob]

Modern artillery still fire over the heads of their own troops and in an emergency will bring the rounds in "danger close". During the Civil War the Union Artillery's effectiveness using exploding shell or case shot would have diminished as the Confederates drew closer. They didn't have mortars and if they had fired canister, it would have been into the backs of their own men. If the Confederates had broken through and forced the Union troops back, then canister would have been used in an attempt to break up the attack. During the attack, only front line batteries such as Cushings would have been firing canister as there were no friendly troops in front of them.

 

[Larryh86GT]

Welcome from WNY

 

[JOHN42768]

Welcome, enjoy

 

[tbuckley]

Welcome from eastern Ohio.

 

[captaindrew]

Welcome from South Florida

 

[Andy Cardinal]

Welcome from northeast Ohio!

 

[Ole Miss]

Welcome from North Mississippi!
Regards
David

 

[UCVRelics]

Welcome From The Heart Of Dixie. Be sure to stop by the Weapons & Ammo and Uniforms & Relics forums. Here is a link that will answer a lot of your questions.

http://www.civilwarartillery.com/books/robertshandbookofartillery.htm

 

[Kip124thNY]

Hello from New Jersey.

 

[rpkennedy]

Several batteries did indeed fire over their fellow troops during the cannonade. Both Rorty's Battery B, 1st New York, Brown's Battery B, 1st Rhode Island, and Cushing's Battery A, 4th United States had infantry in front of them.

When the Confederates neared, lanes were opened in front of the guns but there were a few friendly fire casualties. The 69th Pennsylvania lost a handful of men killed by this fire including (IIRC) Private Edward Head who, ironically, was decapitated by a "friendly" shot.

Ryan

 

[Tom Elmore]

Yes, Union artillery did fire over the heads of their infantry, and yes, "friendly fire" casualties did occur as a consequence. For this reason, use of canister was generally avoided, and that's why Cushing ran a couple of of his guns down toward the wall near "The Angle" to lessen the danger to the right flank of the 69th Pennsylvania. Even so, Privates Edward Head and Christian Rohlfing of Company I had their heads taken off by a round from one of these guns. Cowan's New York Battery was equally dangerous behind the other (left) flank of the 69th Pennsylvania. Some soldiers were killed by its grape and canister, while others were injured from rocks and stones thrown up by these rounds.

Confederate infantry, on the other hand, that were typically posted behind their artillery were spared this particular "friendly" threat. However, they faced an even greater danger from enemy artillery overshots. Such overshots were common on both sides, meaning that anyone positioned just behind the batteries was going to suffer badly.

There are other similar recorded instances of casualties to Union infantry inflicted by Union cannon firing behind them:

-On July 2, Brown's battery was throwing grape and canister over the 15th Massachusetts, but "a good share of it" struck that regiment.

-Early on July 3 a defective shell from Pettit's battery exploded at the muzzle of the gun - a piece wounded an infantryman lying behind a wall in front of them.

-Late on July 3, a gun from Hazlett's battery on Little Round Top had its face blown off by careless loading, killing an infantryman just to their front.

-Premature explosions of some shells from guns firing on Cemetery Hill caused a few casualties among Smith's brigade posted down the slope. A soldier of this brigade also recalled that the pieces of wood that helped keep the flannel powder bag attached to the ball often struck with "such force as to produce great pain."

I haven't made a study of the problem, but am inclined to think that it was still safer statistically just in front of the guns than just behind them. Clearly there is no safe place on any battlefield, but the threat of being struck down by your own side would seem to be particularly hard to bear, even if the odds were slim.

 

[lelliott19]

Hello @ianr38 and welcome to CivilWarTalk -- the best place on the internet for Civil War discussion. Happy to have you aboard!

Another documented casualty accidentally inflicted by Union batteries upon Union Infantry in their front:
1st Lt Henry Ropes, Company K, 20th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry. Killed July 3 by a defective shell fired by a New York battery, just behind him on Cemetery Ridge, which exploded prematurely. He was an 1862 graduate of Harvard University, just 24 years old. ["Henry Ropes," Harvard Memorial Biographies with Supplementary Biographies, edited by Thomas Wentworth Higginson, University Press, Welch, Bigelow & Co., Cambridge, 1867, p. 311]

I just noticed @Tom Elmore 's post above which lists an unnamed infantryman behind a wall in front of Pettit's battery. Tom, could Ropes have been the man? Was the 20th Massachusetts near Pettit's battery?

 

[Tom Elmore]

Laura, it was a different incident. The one I cited occurred very early on July 3, while Ropes was killed in the afternoon if I recall correctly. However, Pettit's battery was likely responsible in that instance too.

 

[Deleted User CS]

Welcome from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

 

[thomas aagaard]

I haven't made a study of the problem, but am inclined to think that it was still safer statistically just in front of the guns than just behind them.

It the end it is all about numbers. If this is the price for putting effective artillery fire on the enemy during his attack, (and having infantry in line to repel it at the same time) then it is a small price to pay for the army.

During the great war, when you attacked you would try to hug your own rolling barrage so close that you lost men to it...
Losing a few men to you own artillery was much better than risking the enemy having time to come out of his bunkers, set up machine guns and mow down your attack... with fare greater looses to you and likely a failed attack.

 

[Wallyfish]

Small writeup on Henry Ropes courtesy of the Harvard Gazette.


First Lt. Henry Ropes, Class of 1862, was reading the Dickens novel in the quiet on the morning of July 3. About 60 yards behind him, on Cemetery Ridge, a federal artilleryman stuffed a defective shell into a cannon and touched it off. Shrapnel from the premature airburst knifed through Ropes, a popular officer with the 20th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry. He died on the spot, his last words being, "I am killed." Ropes — who had boxed, rowed, and fenced at Harvard — was 24.

 

[Tom Elmore]

One more example, from an officer of the 17th Connecticut at the foot of Cemetery Hill, referring to the July 2 dusk attack on their position: "The battery in our rear was giving them a warm reception with grape and canister, firing over our heads. I remember the lead wadding from one shot killed one of our men, which demoralized us worse than the enemy in our front." (Lt. Milton Daniels, Company C, 17th Connecticut, Connecticut Yankees at Gettysburg)

 

[TerryB]

Howdy from Music City!

 

[22ndGa]

Welcome Ian R, from north central Florida! I have often thought of your very question. Even as a reenactor I was worried about the rammers of the artillery immediately behind me!