Every man w/ a bayonet

[Johan Steele]

I've noted something in some of my research, namely notable absences of bayonets on Company inventories, w/ at least one list showing only about a third of the men w/ bayonets.

How comon was this, especially among Western feds? I can see some bayonets falling by the wayside on a campaign, or men being issued rifles w/out bayonets as happened to the 3rd MN when they initially received Enfields. W/ the difficulty of fitting bayonets to a different rifle was this an common issue w/ the issue of captured weapons? Or did Ordnance Sgt's go to work w/ files to make them fit?

[markj]

Re: Every man w/ a bayonet

Greetings,

Take a look at the attachment below. This is a small sample of what I recently pulled from documentation at the National Archives.

And, yes, bayonets sometimes had to be "finessed" in order to make them properly fit rifle-muskets issued to troops. Colonel Edward A. King, 68th Indiana Volunteer Infantry, noted large numbers of ill-fitting bayonets while his regiment was organizing in Indianapolis IN in late 1862 and issued a general order directing they be fixed.

Regards,

Mark Jaeger

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Every man w/ a bayonet

Hallo Kamerad!

The question you pose is both complicated and broad, IMHO too broad as to unit specific, time and place specific, to be able to make any useful generalization or condensation from it.

For example, in Berdan Sharpshooter history...

Colonel Hiram Berdan was largely displeased with the way the "Army" was using his Sharpshooters as scouts and skirmishers instead of as "marksmen" (snipers to use the modern term).
Fearful that the receipt of the bayonets for the new Berdan Contract NM1859 Sharps Rifles might would "secure" the role of infantry, Berdan "gave" the men the option of taking them or not when they arrived in May and June of 1862.

This became a problem, when the regiment was inspected in December of 1862 where it was found that about HALF the men did not have them, the inspector Lt. Col. Nelson Bartram of the 17th NY having found out that the men were allowed to choose to take them or not.

This and other issues led to a court martial in March of 1863. After sneaking through the court martial, regimental records indicate that there were 247 bayonets for 426 Sharps rifles on hand. 248 were delivered in time for the Gettysburg Campaign.

Now for some of the Sharpshooter companies the numbers varied. For example, the Vermont company had a total of 6 bayonets for 47 men (and 7 scabbards) in May 1863, and 11 bayonets and scabbards in January of 1864- which earned them another bad inspection report and lead to the assignment of a major to "shape up" the USSS in March.

Again, the presence or absence of gear is unit, time, and place specific, and IMHO, we should avoid sweeping generalizations as they may, or may not, be true for the unit we portray.

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt

[Charles Heath]

Re: Every man w/ a bayonet

Or did Ordnance Sgt's go to work w/ files to make them fit?

Johan,

As with many things it depends on the documentation. Curt mentioned that in his post rather eloquently. Some organizations, such as Mahone's Division, were known, even late in the war, for maintaining a high state of equipment maintenance discipline, and were well stocked with bayonets. Many accounts of men on the march simply mention them flinging away the dreaded extra weight, so it's a matter of looking at the context of supply and loss on a case by case basis. As a subjective point, shined brass, blackened leathers, highly maintained weapons, and strong materiel accountability can be clues as to a high state of organization morale. (For the cynics, it can be interpreted along with that old saw about garrison troops and inspection readiness instead of combat readiness.)

Not pertaining directly to your question, is a little more information on the "Ordnance Sergeant" in the field. It's an old reenactorism that "every company has an Ordnance Sergeant," which was a good place to put an old timer, blah, blah, blah. As a counter to this practice, a campaignerism was to totally eliminate and nearly deny the existance of the Ordnance Sergeant. Between the two polarized positions a good number of heated discussions have transpired over the years. They existed in some surprising places, and the bottom line is whether or not the Ordnance Sergeant (or the bayonet for that matter) is appropriate for the scenario or vignette portrayed.

The following may serve as a quick and dirty primer, and most of the major sources are covered:

Good photographs, nice example:

http://www.eclectichistorian.net/CharlesMellon/

Phil Katcher’s Ordnance Sergeant article:

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Base/3964/ordnance.html

Just a brief example from the 54th Indiana Infantry:

http://www.hoosiersoldiers.com/NCOs/Rank/ORD%20SGT/Rank%20Roster%20(NCO%20-%20ORDSGT).htm

Slightly off topic, but an example from Fort Scott:

http://www.nps.gov/fosc/FORT/PostHQ/posthq5.html

Those familiar QM museum images (again) and the "mystery" of the Ordnance Corporal:

http://www.qmmuseum.lee.army.mil/1866uniform/od_qm.html

The ups and downs of the Fort Macon Ordnance Sergeant and his beloved post:

http://www.clis.com/friends/seizure.htm

Nothing really new or exciting in the above links, but it is well worth a good read to bust a few of the "myths" commonly accepted on either side of the fence. It's a good reminder that behind every good infantryman is a number of folks turning the wrenches, and other tasks.

Charles Heath
Scientia ad justitiam

[Johan Steele]

Re: Every man w/ a bayonet

Gents, I appreciate the replies. What got me wondering was a conversation on another board about PEC for some specific units. After looking at some inventories I had to question just how common it was for western troops to always have bayonets on campaign, or for that matter to ever have been issued bayonets in the first place.

For instance I know there is little doubt that every Infantryman in the Regulars carried a bayonet and there are regiments that can be easily documented the same. That being said I had difficulty finding a single bayonet w/ the 3rd MN for almost a 6 mos period after they were issued Enfield's. The same was also true of the 3rd IA. Another mystery to me was the question about Springfield or other bayonets w/ Enfields. Apparently this happened, as I stumbled across a reference, to some Regiments at Vicksburg who were issued captured Enfields w/out bayonets; apparently working w/ a file and using bayonets from their original issued "foreign junk" they solved their problem.

Apparently there was also some problems w/ Regiments that were issued Lorenz rifle muskets where some had saber bayonets and the rest the standard... the saber bayonets quickly found their way onto the side of the road and thos eissued saber bayonets did w/out. I couldn't figure out for how long though.

The more I learn the more I acknowledge my ignorance.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Every man w/ a bayonet

Hallo Kamerad!

I am not fully sure I understand the point you are trying to remake, or the question to have reanswered...

It is not "historically accurate or very safe" to lean toward making universal statements about "western troops" versus "eastern troops," or the Regulars, as I shared with the Hiram Berdan and Sharpshooters in the winter of 1862-1863's bayonet controversy and court martial. (read as: all the time and in every instance).

We seem to have come full circle twice with the concept of time and place for specific units, and your own post shares specific units at specific times and places who have "bayonet problems" due to mismatched guns and bayonet types?

I am not harping on your question or your thinking, just trying to salvage a "research theme" for when any question arises.

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt

[Johan Steele]

Re: Every man w/ a bayonet

Curt, I'm sorry for not making myself more clear. The overall question I'm trying to get input on is how common was it for a soldier not to have a bayonet in the field. I mention the west as that is where I have the most interest and have been doing most of my research. Many of the inventories I have viewed omit the mention of bayonets completely... though I was told that this usually meant they had a complete issue. THe units I mentioned, 3rd MN & 3rd IA... I can't seem to verify whether they were the exception to the norm or not. And those who tossed away saber bayonets, does anyone know how long they would have been w/out bayonets? Weeks, mos etc... These are questions I have ideas on the answer to, but my ideas seem more like educated guesses.

To add still more confusion to my guessing is a statement from a man in the 4th MN. I'm paraphrasing: "I bought my rifle and would have liked a bayonet for nostalgia's sake but hadn't had one since before Atlanta." Snippets like this seem to imply that at least some men didn't have bayonets for quite a while... and didn't seem to be punished for it. At the same time the statement also verifies that he at least had one for a while.

It's not that I'm saying a lot of men shouldn't carry bayonets, I'm just wondering if it would be more PEC to have men in the ranks w/out when doing a generic Western Fed impression. And looking for other sets of eyes that see things more clearly than I do.

Mr Heath's web links helped clear up the role of the Ordnance Sgt quite a bit, my own knowledge of the rank came from the regs etc... I'd never read of one actively serving in the field and had begun to wonder if they were mostly Rear Echelon.

THanks

[Charles Heath]

Re: Every man w/ a bayonet

Johan,

What you have in hand is the germ for a nifty research article. You think X, have researched a little Y and Y-not, and are trying to make headway one way or the other. It's a head scratcher and a good place to start.

Take a few moments to read this helpful piece:

http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2928

There's also a Part B to that lovely post close by. Take a few moments to read that, too.

By researching another 30-40 units during the same timeframe, it is possible to develop a pattern (perhaps) or at least a notion that there really is something to this hypothesis that requires further study. How common were bayonets in the period 1863-1865 in midwestern drawn western theatre units? No idea. It would take a decade or so to do enough research to make it clear (maybe), but it is possible to sample units (random or not) and be able to state in regiments X, Y & Z "certain shortages appear based on the following documentation." At this point it is probably good to go back and read the posts about the "brown thread myth." It is hysterically funny, and true, as it illustrates how easy it is to develop false conclusions.

I'll add something about mismatched bayonets. Thanks to Dave Born, I have handled an 1863 Springfield barrel with an Enfield bayonet attached and well oxidized thanks to 135+ years of exposure. It was dropped most likely sometime during April 6, 1865, and not found until about 1997 when a field was being bushogged at Sailors Creek Battlefield. Due to oxidation, it was very well attached. There's one, and just one, example of mismatched longarm/bayonet. Do more exist? You betcha. The fun part is poking around collections and finding them.

This is a great area for research. It IS very difficult to pick up the threads from a couple of isolated examples, and weave whole cloth for all armies in all theatres, even if it is human nature to do so. As absolutely no help whatsoever, I was thinking (dangerous words) about the hardships of overland transportation at that time, and perhaps the federals were trying to move subsistence and ammunition rather than the heavy steel of bayonets. For some reason, I had visions of Si Klegg and the Cracker Line. Probably doesn't apply, but in some cases transportation difficulties were behind a number of things people did back then that doesn't automatically make sense to us today.

I look forward to reading the article. :)

Charles Heath

[1863_CSAdentist]

Re: Every man w/ a bayonet

Well I am not sure but were they not issued in the start of the war. But like most items tossed away after the long walk. But also most were not used to the fact there wasn't much use for them. Because charging with bayonet was old Nepoleon style of war fare and only used like at Gettysburg when there was no other choice. This is what I was told by others in the hobbie.

Hallo! Welcome to the AC Forums. Our forum rules require that you sign your full name to your posts and replies. So please remember to always sign, or edit your auto signature to do it automatically for you.

Thanks you.

Please consider this your first warning.

Also, please review your reply. I am giving you the initial benefit of the doubt here, this time, and assume you are not a Troll or Flame Baiter.
The AC Forum is place for serious, documentable, and as far as possible, historical, archaeological, and academic-based postings and discussions. Feel welcome here to learn, grow, and progress- just be sure you are ready and have a grasp of how things "work" on the AC Forum, information, and discussions.

Thank you.

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt, Moderator