"Fire By Rotation" - Documented or Not?????

[markj]

Re: "Fire By Rotation" - Documented or Not?????

The street firing appendix is only a page or so. If folks are interested, I will put the text up tomorrow.

Greetings Greg,

Actually, the story of "street firing" is even more complicated than you think since the 1858 Regulations for the New York State Militia carries a very lengthy section dealing with this subject. I have a complete copy of this work and can also furnish information from it upon request. I have not yet been able to obtain a complete copy of the the 1866 NY National Guard drill manual published by Colonel Geo. M. Baker (I do have various extracts from it) but I suspect "street firing" is also mentioned there.

Baker's work is interesting and useful since it is based on "Hardee/Casey" but fills in various gaps encountered those works (e.g., how and when file-closers stack arms). It can be arguably called a "Civil War-era manual" since it was published no later than April/May 1866 and its author saw active service with the 21st NYVI and 74th NGSNY.

Regards,

Mark Jaeger

[hireddutchcutthroat]

Re: "Fire By Rotation" - Documented or Not?????

"(15th Wisconsin...?) using this type of tactic at the battle of Chickamauga in 1863."

Det är skitsnack! :wink_smil

[Silas]

Street Firing

LESSON VIII.
STREET FIRING

717. Street firing is the method of firing adapted to defend or clear a street, lane, or narrow pass, in the execution of which the company or platoon must be formed according to the width of the place, leaving sufficient space on the flanks for the platoons to file successively to the rear.
718. When the column has arrived at the place where the firing is to commence, the commanding officer will give the command:

1. Column - HALT. 2. Prepare for Street Firing.

719. At this command, all the captains will pass by the right flank to the rear of their companies, covering the centre. The colonel next commands:

Commence - FIRING.

720. The captain of the first company will promptly command:

1. First company. 2. Ready. 3. Aim. 4. FIRE.
5. Recover - ARMS. 6. Outward - FACE. 7. MARCH.

721. The first platoon faces to the right, the second to the left; the first platoon conducted by the captain, the second by the first lieutenant, will file right and left around the flanks towards the rear, halt on the flanks opposite the centre of the column, re-load, and as soon as the rear of the column has passed the platoons, the captain will command:

1. Platoons. 2. Right and Left Face. 3. MARCH.

722. At which command, the first platoon faces to the left, and files left; and the second to the right, and files right; and unite in rear of the column. At the instant the soldiers of the first company recover their arms after firing, the captain of the second will order:

1. Second Company. 2. Ready.

723. The second company will wait in that position until the front is cleared by the first company, when the captain will cause it to advance twice its front (followed by all the companies in the rear), and fire, file down the ranks in the same order as prescribed for the first company.
724. Firing in retreat is conducted on the same principles as on the advance, except that the companies fire without advancing, on the front being cleared by the former company; and, instead of halting on the flanks, the platoons will pass immediately to the rear of the column, counter-march, form, and re-load. The same principles will be observed in column of platoons as column of company.

US Tactics p. 385 / Handy Book pp. 89-91.

I included this in the manual I recently compiled. The lesson number and paragraph numbering noted in the quote are as written in my manual, not the U.S. Tactics or the Handy Book. This is the same manual which may become a Bully Buy once my vendor status has been finalized in this forum. [That's a subtle nudge, Paul.] I'm hoping to publish some webpages this weekend which show how what makes this manual a must-have.

I first saw Street Firing in the Handy Book, but also noticed it in the 1861 U.S. Tactics. It's just interesting enough that it deserved inclusion. Someone may find use for it.

[DougCooper]

Re: "Fire By Rotation" - Documented or Not?????

Now we are getting somewhere! Saw this done for the first time very well in a street fight way back in 1988 in Barnesville, MD. Company front by a battalion in retreat. We used it at McDowell as well.

Have seen Silas' book - fills a hole and is an excellent accompaniment to Dom's PIE and IGP.

[Greg Renault]

Re: "Fire By Rotation" - Documented or Not?????

Thanks for the text, Mark; you saved me lots of typing. I am very interested in your work, and look forward to seeing it when it becomes available.

My source for street firing is the US Infantry Tactics, Lippincott, 1862. The section on Street Firing occurs immediately following paragraph 989 of the School of the Battalion. In my edition the pages are 491-493 inclusive; pagination may be different in the repro USIT, which is a copy of the 1863 edition.

The street firing section is set in the same type as the rest of the manual, but the heading is in a sans-serif font (the only one in the whole book), and the paragraphs are not numbered. These typesetting differences mark it as an addition to the main manual; however it is clearly grouped with the School of the Battalion, and not with the appendices.

In my edition the commands and instructions are combined in the same paragraph, so the usual "drill manual" format that Mark presents is not present. The actual language is the same, however. Further, there are three additional paragraphs following the last one Mark presents, which respectively deal with forming square, reforming column, and use of a mountain howitzer to suppress crowds ("without injury to property in the vicinity").

[JimKindred]

Re: "Fire By Rotation" - Documented or Not?????

Several references have been given for this but are any in a manual that was officially adopted by the War Department or the US Army?

The reason I ask is that there are civilian publications now that expound on current military tactics but are not part of the offical system of publications that would have you laughed out of a briefing if you referenced one.

[bqbowden]

Re: "Fire By Rotation" - Documented or Not?????

Ben,

I was unable to attend Selma this year but I too am familiar with the esteemed gentleman in question. If the maneuver you describe is correct, then it is not listed in Hardee's or Cooke's. This drill is actually from an older manual (of which I forget the name and date - maybe Mexican War). The only reason I remember it is because last year at Tunnel Hill on Sunday when both of the commanding generals went down due to their horses laying down on them it was near the end of the battle and the gentleman in question took over and used this command/drill to keep the troops alive long enough to allow our comrads to retreat in order.

Perhaps the best source on this is to ask the gentleman himself - he would be more than happy to describe the source to you.

[Tom Ezell]

Re: "Fire By Rotation" - Documented or Not?????

We (the wascally webels) used this in one engagement when the Yankees caught up to us in a tight place during Red River II, and Dom dal Bello has discussed it a time or two ages ago in other threads. The source is as Mark cited it, one of the offbeat editions of the U.S. Infantry Tactics published by Lipppincott, essentially Hardee's book without his name on it, and touched up a bit by parties otherwise unknown.

To re-hash the discussion (from Szabo's forum around Christmas 2002):

tompritchett
Charter Member
744 posts Dec-22-02, 04:52 PM (EST)

"Street Fighting"

While my commander and I were working crowd control at the Fredericksburg reenactment battle, I noticed the Federal forces using a tactic that I had never seen before. Basically, the Federals were advancing up the street in column formation. The front file would then take a couple of quick steps forward, fire, and then break to the rear file two men to each side. At this point, the next file repeated the process and so on as the column slowly advanced up the street while continuing to put fire on the defending Confederates. While I thought that this was an impressive manuever, I had to wonder whether it was a period correct manuever. Could anyone please supply some references to where this particular tactic originated? Thank you.
Thomas H. Pritchett
2nd SCVI




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



RE: Street Fighting, FWL, Dec-28-02, 08:08 PM, (34)
Thanks!, Columbia_Rifles, Dec-29-02, 09:24 AM, (38)
RE: Street Fighting, tompritchett, Dec-28-02, 11:04 PM, (37)
RE: Street Fighting, texcav, Dec-27-02, 05:36 PM, (31)
The soldiers' view..., Gary, Dec-25-02, 11:20 PM, (17)
RE: The soldiers' view..., Columbia_Rifles, Dec-26-02, 09:41 AM, (19)
Sorry, Gary, Dec-26-02, 01:32 PM, (21)
RE: The soldiers' view..., tompritchett, Dec-26-02, 00:08 AM, (18)
In a listing...., Cazadores, Dec-25-02, 10:01 PM, (15)
Tactic listed, ovi, Dec-26-02, 11:44 PM, (27)
RE: Tactic listed, tompritchett, Dec-27-02, 12:36 PM, (29)
RE: Tactic listed, indguard, Dec-27-02, 06:53 AM, (28)
Source, ovi, Dec-28-02, 09:30 PM, (35)
RE: Source, 1stMaine, Dec-28-02, 10:45 PM, (36)
RE: Tactic listed, Columbia_Rifles, Dec-27-02, 01:20 PM, (30)
RE: Street Fighting, lolifepvt, Dec-24-02, 08:06 AM, (12)
The catipillar tactic, SgtTodd, Dec-26-02, 12:28 PM, (20)
RE: The catipillar tactic, tompritchett, Dec-26-02, 03:29 PM, (22)
RE: The catipillar tactic, SgtTodd, Dec-28-02, 04:58 PM, (32)
RE: The catipillar tactic, tompritchett, Dec-28-02, 06:35 PM, (33)
RE: Street Fighting, Hank_Trent, Dec-23-02, 01:22 PM, (9)
Correct Answer is HERE!, RJSamp, Dec-29-02, 03:11 PM, (39)
Remember one of Roger's Rangers Rules?, Gary, Dec-29-02, 07:47 PM, (40)
RE: Remember one of Roger's Rangers Rules?, tompritchett, Dec-29-02, 08:55 PM, (41)
RE: Street Fighting, TheQM, Dec-23-02, 01:06 PM, (8)
How Common....?, Columbia_Rifles, Dec-23-02, 01:01 PM, (7)
RE: How Common....?, KyBaccaFarm, Dec-23-02, 07:11 PM, (11)
RE: Brush Creek, Columbia_Rifles, Dec-24-02, 01:59 PM, (13)
A whiff of grape, Mr. Wilson!, 1stMaine, Dec-25-02, 10:18 PM, (16)
Grape this!, KJAir, Dec-30-02, 11:40 AM, (42)
RE: A whiff of grape, Mr. Wilson!, tompritchett, Dec-26-02, 10:18 PM, (26)
Stop making sense!, Bill_Cross, Dec-26-02, 04:07 PM, (23)
RE: Stop making sense!, 1stMaine, Dec-26-02, 04:37 PM, (25)
RE: How Common....?, KJAir, Dec-23-02, 01:33 PM, (10)
RE: How Common....?, Bill_Cross, Dec-26-02, 04:15 PM, (24)
RE: How Common....?, Columbia_Rifles, Dec-24-02, 02:11 PM, (14)
Advance Fire, ovi, Dec-23-02, 10:04 AM, (6)
RE: Street Fighting, polishedrifle, Dec-23-02, 09:18 AM, (5)
RE: Street Fighting, Pogue_Mahone, Dec-23-02, 08:56 AM, (4)
RE: Street Fighting, KJAir, Dec-22-02, 06:14 PM, (1)
RE: Street Fighting, tompritchett, Dec-22-02, 06:50 PM, (2)
Fair enough...., KJAir, Dec-22-02, 07:21 PM, (3)

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic
FWL
Charter Member
34 posts Dec-28-02, 08:08 PM (EST)

34. "RE: Street Fighting"
In response to message #0


I have read with interest your comments on street fighting in Fredericksburg. I remembered I had read a first hand account of that action so here it is from the fog of war, I hope its useful to you and its not too long but I thought it was worth it, Happy Holidays from New England here it is:
Portions of the Letter of Henry Ropes to John Codman Ropes December 18, 1862 from Bob Dames web site:

Detailed description of the intense street fighting of the 20th Mass. in Fredericksburg, Va. on December 11, 1862. Contained in the Manuscripts of the Boston Public Library.

Camp 20th Regiment near Falmouth
Va. December 18th 1862

My dear John:
I have determined to write you a tremendous letter, giving a full account of our late battles and answering your letter about my expenses, the Estates etc received by Col. Lee. (the other Lee in the Union Army) And first the account of the battle etc…….

…..The 20th advanced up the street, and when the head of the column out to where the 7th Michigan men were, on the left, in a kind of alley way, and occupying a house, Macy called to them to go ahead. Capt. Hunt, their commanding officer was there, and he hesitated and refused. Macy was obliged to halt and urge him to go forward. Capt. Hunt still refused, saying he had no orders, and Macy, much irritated, told him his orders, which were very plain, to go forward and follow the 7th. Orders came from the rear to press on, Hunt still hung back, saying the Rebels were there in force, and "no man could live around that corner", or some such words. Macy was of course terribly angry, and turned off saying: "Go to ##### with your regiment then", or something like that, and gave the order to advance. All this occurred but for 2 or 3 minutes, yet it was very troublesome, as the rear was pressing close. My Company was close to Abbott's, and we entered upon the main street within a moment of each other. That instant a tremendous and deadly fire swept down from the front and left. The Rebels occupied the houses and were behind fences, and could not be seen except for the flash of the guns. It staggered the column, but in a moment we pressed on, led by Abbott in his usual fearless manner. At the same time my Company was ordered to left wheel, and Capt. Shepard gave the first word, and the Company swung round right across the worst line of fire. Capt. Shepard called over, hit in the foot, and shouted to me to take command. 1st Sergeant Campion fell, and 2 or 3 more, and before I could get to my place, they had fallen into a momentary confusion, and it was with no little difficulty I could bring them into line and open fire down the street. The Rebels evidently took good aim. Almost every ball struck, and a very large proportion were killed outright or desparately wounded. The 3rd Company had wheeled to the right but had found the fire coming from the rear and left (to them) and had soon entered the houses on the left and fired to the front. The men were killed and wounded so fast that the rest of the Regiment was immediately called up and supported the Companies first in position. In this way Companies, D, A and C came up and filled that part of the street my company could not cover. The entire place was heaped with bodies, and although night was coming on, the Rebels were not silenced, but still fired, and even got into a small house on the left of Company I, from which Abbott vainly tried to dislodge them in entering a house on his left. Our guns were getting clogged, our fire slack, and Macy sent back urgent requests for help, and for the Regiments on our right and left to advance, and altogether to clear the Rebels out. The 59th New York were sent up to relieve us, but as soon as they got under fire, gave way, and ran back, and were only rallied by the efforts of our Officers, and their own Lieut. ? who seemed the only decent man they had. Just before they came up, I was struck by a spent ball in the upper part of my groin, a very severe blow which cut completely through my trowsers. I fell backwards, and was assisted by a soldier. My leg was completely paralyzed , and I almost lost my consciousness, and felt sure I was shot through. I left the Company to Sergeant Clark, and limped to the rear, suffering considerable pain. Just around the corner I leaned against a fence, and now felt better and found I could move my leg. Just then the 59th gave way, and came running back, and I made an effort to stop them, and after a few minutes they were rallied, and I then found I could stand, and got back immediately to my Company which was still as I left it. My leg was pretty stiff for 3 days but is now perfectly well. It ws now getting dark, my Company had dwindled down to about 8 men and the rifles were so foul they could hardly be loaded. We had fired about 30 rounds. Macy had sent up the other Companies and the left of the street was left open, the men who were left firing from the right partly sheltered by the brick building. The 59th had been got up and were ordered to relieve us, and my few men were allowed to go to the rear with Company D under Perkins. I did not mention that Capt. Dreher had been ordered to support me with his company, and had come up, but he almost immedialtely withdrew his company and they fell entirely back. The color bearer, however, was shot. Abbott had suffered terribly and the 59th were sent to relieve him, and as it was now dark and the firing less deadly, they stood about the corners and kept firing while our Companies were drawn a little back, but only to the head of the street where there were two stores. In a few moments, however, they all came running back in terrible confusion and were only stopped by Abbott, Herbert and myself who placed ourselves across the street and fairly forced them to halt. They could not be brought up and so (as we had received orders) we got back our men to the houses and stores at the head of the street and the firing gradually dropped off. We got in our wounded and helped them to the rear as well as we could. Just as the 59th gave way the last time, I went forward to where two men were carrying back a wounded Captain of the 59th and helped him off. His blood was pouring out in a stream which I could hear, but not see. He was mortally wounded and was I hear their best Officer. Lieut. McKay was shot just by me, a short distance behind Company I near the corner, just before we fell back for the night. He was one of our very best officers. We occupied these houses all night. The enemy fell back, and there was no more firing. On the whole, it was about as trying a fight as could well be. Abbott said it was far worse than Ball's Bluff.


Also below is an account from a witness of the 20th’s advance by a Corporal of the 10th Mass.

"A Useless Slaughter of Gallant Men"
From Greeley, A.W. Reminiscences of Adventure and Service. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1927. Greeley was a Corporal in Co. B of the 19th Massachusetts Infantry, and witnessed the street fighting.

pp. 84-85: "It took a long time, the building of our bridge and the crossing of our troops, but they came soon enough to save the remnants of the 'forlorn hope'. The first reenforcements I saw were the 20th Massachusetts Infantry, who, to our horror and against the outcries of the 7th Michigan and the 19th Massachusetts, made their disastrous advance. Marching, as one man quoted, 'into the jaws of #####', the 20th lost within ten minutes and in the distance of one square of ground ninety-seven killed and wounded. Thrown into platoon fronts I saw the 20th make this desperate march, with no definite end in view as far as anyone could see, into the most useless slaughter I ever witnessed. It was a wonderful display of orderly movement by a body of men of unsurpassed courage and coolness. Instead of skirmishing warfare and fighting from house to house, as we advised, the advance was in mass, with no enemy in sight on whom to fire....this was one of the minor instances of military incompetency, no matter what friends may advance in excuse of the commander. A useless slaughter of gallant men, it did not gain a yard beyond advances already made, and ended in retirement to cover."

I hope this was useful to you all and not too tedious, for more info refer to Bob Dames’s excellent web site at
which discusses the Battle of Fredericksburg in detail (at least the street fighting portion). Incidentally the lead company of the 20th, which was terribly cut up, was Company I from the small island of Nantucket off the Mass coast. The town was devastated almost ½ the company was wiped out.

Frank Lilley
20th Mass Vol.

“We have shared the incommunicable experience of war. We have felt, we still feel the passion of life to its top….In our youth our hearts were touched by fire”
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
Captain 20th Mass Vol.







Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top


Columbia_Rifles
Charter Member
118 posts Dec-29-02, 09:24 AM (EST)

38. "Thanks!"
In response to message #34

Frank,
Those are some excellent accounts! Thanks very much for posting them.

Relative to this topic, the accounts don't mention any type of "street fighting" tactic other than skirmishing and, of course, getting shot all to heck when advancing en masse.

Thanks for posting this.


Regards,

Kevin O'Beirne
ColumbiaRifles@aol.com



Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



tompritchett
Charter Member
744 posts Dec-28-02, 11:04 PM (EST)

37. "RE: Street Fighting"
In response to message #34

I particularly liked both the letter and the painting of the scene which was found at http://www.harvardregiment.org/fire_...ine_street.htm.
Thomas H. Pritchett
2nd SCVI




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



texcav
Member since Sep-19-02
15 posts Dec-27-02, 05:36 PM (EST)

31. "RE: Street Fighting"
In response to message #0

Hi Tom.. Been a while since we talked. I've changed companys after 12 years and now have a new e-mail address.. WilG@WIScoInc.com
This tactic is in the 11th's repitoire.. but remember, as dismounted, we're marching in a column of four to begin with, so the manuever becomes very easy and once done, second nature to the men.. It can be halted and reversed quite easily, to advance and then withdraw.

We used it very effectively at Raymond on Friday while pursuing a Federal Btn down the road.. To keep the boys in Blue in cheque, I also had two companies in skirmish order deployed in the woods, on either side, to protect the flanks.. In the end, they barracaded themselves, and I halted the column, having the men step up to the line, volley fire and retire.. They were so busy watching the column, we wheeled the wings and cut them down in a three way cross fire..

Doing this down a road, vs street fighting.. We were moving too fast for them to shinny up any trees in an attempt to take high ground.. lol. There's no way I'd enter into a hostile held urban area doing this manuever.. I'd be suicide..

Wil Gibson
11th Texas Cavalry





Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top


Gary
Charter Member
29 posts Dec-25-02, 11:20 PM (EST)

17. "The soldiers' view..."
In response to message #0

Here's what I found on streetfighting in Fredericksburg:
19th Mass Lt. John Adams: "As soon as the boats touched the shore we formed by companies, and, without waiting for regimental formation, charged up the stree, on reaching the main street we found that the fire came from houses in front and rear. Company B lost ten men out of thirty in less than five minutes. Other companies suffered nearly the same. We were forced to fall back to the river, deploy as skirmishers, and reched the main street through the yards and houses... Capt. Weymouth went from right to left of the line, giving instructions and urging the men forward. My squad was composed of men from companies I and A. We had reached a gate, and were doing our best to cross the street. I had lost three men when Captain Weymouth came up. "Can't you go forward, Lieutenant Adams?" he said. My reply was, "It is mighty hot, captain." he said, "I guess you can," and started to go through the gate, when as much as a barrel of bullets came at him. He turned and said, "It is quite warm, lieutenant; go up through to house." We then entered the back door and passed upsairs to the front. Gilman Nichols of Company A was inadvance. He found the door locked and burst it open with the butt of his musket. The moment it opened he fell dead, shot from a house on the other side of the street. Several others were wounded, but we held the house until dark, firing at a head whenver we saw one on the other side."

The 7th Michigan got pinned and didn't advance. Unlike the 19th Mass that avoided going up the street, the 20th did with fatal results: "Think of it, a company of about sixty men advancing up a street with no protection whatever and two or three hundred of the enemy sheltered completely and pouring a murderous fire upon you from every window, door, and behind every fence. They would even poke their guns around the corner of the hosues and fire into us at close range... We lost about forty men from our company in the space of fity yards. In no battle of the war did we lose so many men in so short a time."

What they needed was a Renault tank, but that would be another War.




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top


Columbia_Rifles
Charter Member
118 posts Dec-26-02, 09:41 AM (EST)

19. "RE: The soldiers' view..."
In response to message #17

Thanks for posting this account of Fredericksburg '62. It sure sounds more like fighting in Stalingrad 1942 than the Civil War. More importantly, it sounds like the idea of the "street fighting" tactic as discussed on this thread would have been suicide in Fredericksburg.
Thanks for posting this.

For Christmas I received what looks like an excellent new book entitled, "The Fredericksburg Campaign: Winter War on the Rappahannock" (2003), and later today I'll take a look at the chapter on the street fighting and see if there's any reference to anything that even remotely resembles the "street fighting" tactic we've been discussing here.


Regards,

Kevin O'Beirne
ColumbiaRifles@aol.com



Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



Gary
Charter Member
29 posts Dec-26-02, 01:32 PM (EST)

21. "Sorry"
In response to message #19

But it's actually two quotes and I neglected to cite my source for the 20th Mass. I wrote (compiled would be more accurate) a 6-7 page paper that I would like to have published someday and it discusses the battle from a soldier's view.
It's quite an interesting battle as one doesn't need to be a strategist or tactician to understand it. It was pure brute strength with no finesse. Those poor soldiers knew they were up for a hard time and the Confederates pitied them. One Confederate even walked away from the battlefield because he became sick of the slaughter.




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



tompritchett
Charter Member
744 posts Dec-26-02, 00:08 AM (EST)

18. "RE: The soldiers' view..."
In response to message #17

" We lost about forty men from our company in the space of fity yards. In no battle of the war did we lose so many men in so short a time."
I suspect the high casualty rate was due to the fact that the enemy shots may have been even more aimed than would have occurred during formation fighting in open and semi-open fields. Just my personal opinion based upon reenacting street combat versus normal battle and not based upon any references.

Thomas H. Pritchett
2nd SCVI




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



Cazadores
Charter Member
10 posts Dec-25-02, 10:01 PM (EST)

15. "In a listing...."
In response to message #0

Fellow Enthusiasts,
I was browsing the "Making of America website"(U of MI) and found a listing of military manuals produced by Lippincott during the ACW.

One of the manuals listed was titled: "The Handy-Book for the U.S. soldier on coming into service." Its contents caught my eye because it listed a section on "Instructions for Street Fighting." It would be interesting to see what this manual contains regarding this particular topic. Has anyone seen this book?

"Willards Target Practice - Manual of Target Pracatice for the Army" also caught my eye but that is for another thread.

This site contains some interesting period articles and books on military subjects as well as general literature and science periodicals. Well worth your time to visit it.

http://moa.umdl.umich.edu//

Sincerely,

Robert Leinweber
I.C.S.S.





Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top


ovi
Charter Member
38 posts Dec-26-02, 11:44 PM (EST)

27. "Tactic listed"
In response to message #15

Comrades...a well read company commander sent me the following taken from his original copy of the 1861 U.S. Infantry Tactics:

STREET FIRING

Street firing is the method of firing adapted to defend or clear a street, lane, or narrow pass, in the execution of which the company or platoon must be formed according to the width of the place, leaving sufficient space on the flanks for the platoons to file successively to the rear.

When the column has arrived at the place where the firing is to commence, the commanding officer will give the word.

Column, halt - Prepare for street firing.

At this command, all the captains will pass by the right flank to the rear of their companies, covering the centre. The Colonel next commands -

Commence firing.

The captain of the first company will promptly command:

First company, ready. aim. fire. recover arms. outward-face. quick-march.

The first platoon face to the right, the second to the left, the first platoon conducted by the captain, the second by the first lieutenant, will file right and left around the flanks towards the rear, halt on the flanks opposite the centre of the column, re-load, and as soon as the rear of the column has passed the platoons, the captain will command:

Platoons-right and left face-march.

At which command, the first platoon faces to the left, and files left and the second to the right, and files right, and unite in rear of the column. At the instant the men of the first company recover their arms after firing, the captain of the second will order such company:

Ready.

and wait in that position until the front is cleared by the first company, when the captain will cause it to advance twice its front (followed by all the companies in rear), and fire, file down the ranks in the same order as prescribed for the first company.

Firing in retreat is conducted on the same principles as on the advance, except that the companies fire without advancing, on the front being cleared by the former company, and, instead of halting on the flanks, the platoons will pass immediately to the rear of the column, counter-march, form, and re-load. The same principle will be observed in column of platoons as column of company.


Kent Dorr
64th OVI
Army of the Ohio




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



tompritchett
Charter Member
744 posts Dec-27-02, 12:36 PM (EST)

29. "RE: Tactic listed"
In response to message #27

Thank you. Is that the same infantry manual that is online at the UM Making of America wbsite? That one had no name associated with it that I could find. Also, it is interesting that this reference does not specific whether it is one or two ranks advancing and firing at a time and is deliberately vague on the number of files and ranks in the overall formation (i.e., "in the execution of which the company or platoon must be formed according to the width of the place").
Thomas H. Pritchett
2nd SCVI




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



indguard
Charter Member
59 posts Dec-27-02, 06:53 AM (EST)

28. "RE: Tactic listed"
In response to message #27

Kent,
Could you be more specific? Was it school of the battalion? School of the company? Was this from Casey's? Scott's? What page and section?

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



ovi
Charter Member
38 posts Dec-28-02, 09:30 PM (EST)

35. "Source"
In response to message #28

Here is some more information from the source:
Quoting the title page, the volume in question is "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.
The owners copy was published by Lippincot, dated 1862.

The owner states, "Much of the material is common to "Hardee's Tactics". However, two "manuels of arms" are included, one for the rifle and one for the musket. The book also contains the Articles of War and a dictionary of military terms, as well as the material on "Street Firing". The "Street Firing" section appears on pp 385-387, just after the close of the "School of the Battalion".

Hope this helps

Kent Dorr
64th OVI
Army of the Ohio





Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



1stMaine
Charter Member
39 posts Dec-28-02, 10:45 PM (EST)

36. "RE: Source"
In response to message #35

LAST EDITED ON Dec-28-02 AT 10:47 PM (EST)

Thank you for posting the source. As for the entire affair, I would forward two points into this discussion.
1.) Hardee's manual was written for the Regiment of Rifles that was to be formed for the US Regulars. It is designed for use with what we refer to as a "2-bander" a reenactorist term. In the vernacular of the CW period, those "2-banders" were rifles, and the longer weapons were either muskets or rifled-muskets. When the manual was written it was assumed that the Riflemen would use Hasrdee's, and the rest of the Army (armed with muskets) would use Scott's tactics.
Hardee's was designed to use the new M1855 rifleman's equipment, which provided for a wide leather belt, a cartridge box which was slung onto the belt so as to be brought around for loading, a fixed sword bayonet scabbard, and 2 loops to support the knapsack straps (that's what those "J" hooks are for..NOT chest straps that cross over). The rest of the line would use the old pattern equipment (which became the standard pattern for everybody during the war anyway).
2.) Street fighting, as promulgated in the article referenced would only be of use against an armed or semi-armed mob. I suspect that the tactic was included as a result of the experience of the 6th Massachusetts in Baltimore, and the desire of commanders to have a means of dispersing a crowd while maintaing unit integrity. Against similarly armed and trained troops, it would be a suicidal tactic, one most likely to get the officer's shot from behind for their foolhardy ideas.
respects,
Tim Kindred
A Rowdy Pard



Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



Columbia_Rifles
Charter Member
118 posts Dec-27-02, 01:20 PM (EST)

30. "RE: Tactic listed"
In response to message #28

The 1861 drill manual is basically Hardee's without his name.

Regards,

Kevin O'Beirne
ColumbiaRifles@aol.com



Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



lolifepvt
Charter Member
8 posts Dec-24-02, 08:06 AM (EST)

12. "RE: Street Fighting"
In response to message #0

Tom,
My Unit has often used this tactic in drill and a couple of times in battle at Resaca and Bridgeport (AL), and it worked well. It's as impressive on the field attacking breastworks, but I have never seen it used for "street fighting"...bet that IS pretty impressive. We call it 'rolling thunder'. I have been told by a respectable former Battn. Commander here in GA that it was not a "period" (so to speak, cause it's not in the books) tactic, but actually earlier, as some have already stated. I've never come across it in any readings on CW tactics, but then again, maybe I haven't read the right source yet?? Who's to say that it didn't slip into the tactics of the time?? Use it...you'll like it.

Pvt. Greg Wright
28th Georgia, Co. G
123rd New York, Co. D




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top


SgtTodd
Member since Sep-17-02
60 posts Dec-26-02, 12:28 PM (EST)

20. "The catipillar tactic"
In response to message #12

I'm sorry, but comments on this tactic being "effective" sort of elude me. While it may be neat to watch, and even do - I don't see it gaining anymore than a column of divisions or platoons could manage.
Based on the description of the fighting in Fredericksburg given above, good troops were firing from cover. When formed troops moved into the streets they were fired on "from front and rear" and one unit of 30 lost 10 men in minutes. This formation is no different in that you still have a closly packed mass of troops being sniped at from windows and doors. The whole thing would disolve in minutes.

It would be a wonderful learning experience to do the whole thing with paintball guns or MILES and see who controlled the street after a while. I have a feeling there would be a very bruised and multi-colored column of troops back at their jump off position grumbling about not reaching the first cross-street.

Gerald Todd
1st Maine Cavalry



Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



tompritchett
Charter Member
744 posts Dec-26-02, 03:29 PM (EST)

22. "RE: The catipillar tactic"
In response to message #20

While I agree with you on the tactical side normally, the crowd situation limited both sides to fighing in formation in just the streets which were made more narrow by the presence of parked cars. That in itself made crowd control even more difficult because certain spectators would hide behind the cars and then pop out onto the street for a quick photo-op - usaully just after or just before the front four Union soldiers fired. In the past, I have always street fought using sniper type tactics as part of small squads rather than fight out of fixed formations.
Thomas H. Pritchett
2nd SCVI




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



SgtTodd
Member since Sep-17-02
60 posts Dec-28-02, 04:58 PM (EST)

32. "RE: The catipillar tactic"
In response to message #22

I realize the problems with the reenactment and the cars, et al.
But the tactic as might actually be used against forces fighting from cover.

Despite the "increased firepower" it may provide, it is still a stationary mass in a narrow space and subject to the same murderous treatment a standard close formation would receive in that situation.

Gerald Todd
1st Maine Cavalry



Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



tompritchett
Charter Member
744 posts Dec-28-02, 06:35 PM (EST)

33. "RE: The catipillar tactic"
In response to message #32

"Despite the "increased firepower" it may provide, it is still a stationary mass in a narrow space and subject to the same murderous treatment a standard close formation would receive in that situation."
I agree and I personally believe that the fire would be even worse than would have been encountered from a similar sized unit fighting in formation. My reasons are as follows:

1) Typically ranges for street fighting are closer than those for formations fighting across open fields. All carefully aimed fire will be more effective.

2) The enemy fire will be more accurate for two reasons. When firing in formations, the tendency is to point the weapon in the general direction of the enemy formation and fire. A soldiers effective field of fire in formation is very limited because of the close proximity of his pards. Also in this limited field of fire, there is very little flexibility in selecting specific targets. The emphasis in formation fighting is laying down as thick a fire as possible as rapidly as possible. (It was this logic that had some regiments insisting on using smoothbore muskets over rifled muskets because smoothbore could be reloaded faster than rifled muskets once the battle had actually commenced.) Finally, a soldier standing in formation that receiving enemy fire will be nervous with all the enemy fire pouring into his unit's ranks. It is very likely, that he, himself may have been wounded at a previous engagement while fighting just out of such a formation. Therefore, it could be assumed that most soldiers fighting from formation were not taking carefully aimed shots with high probabilites hitting anyone at all. However, when a soldier is street fighting several factors kick in that should increase his individual effectivess against a formation of the enemy. First, when street fighting as snipers and skirmishers, you are often fighting from some form of cover. Each shot is typically an aimed shot at a specific individual - be he in a formation or fighting as you are. There are no significant restrictions on fields of fire caused by the close proximity of your pards. Since you are fighting behind some form of cover, there is typically a greater degree of calm which allows for a better aimed shot - even when the shooter has to step out from behind cover to actually fire. I know that the shots that I have taken during street fighting scenarios were considerly more carefully aimed than the bulk of the shots that I have taken during a standard battle reenactment.

3) If one unit is fighting from dispersed firing positions while the other is fighting from a compact formations, the dispersed unit offers far fewer targets for massed formation fire while almost every man in the dispersed force can find a target to shoot at in the compact formation.

All that being said, could such a formation succeed against a dispersed force in a street environment? Yes, if the force with the formation has numerical superiority over the dispersed force and can manage to maintain a rapid rate of massive, sustained fire as they push through and isolate the enemy forces. (I, personally would have used 2 ranks firing at a time rather than one to increase the overall fire and to increase the individual firing rates of my men). But even then, the unit might have to resort to a combination of formation fighting up the streets while skirmish lines fought through the yards and houses between the streets.







Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



Hank_Trent
Charter Member
153 posts Dec-23-02, 01:22 PM (EST)

9. "RE: Street Fighting"
In response to message #0

This sounded like something I recalled from watching Redcoats and Minutemen in my youth in Massachusetts. Did a google, and yup, Rev war types do it still. From http://reenacting.net/battleroad/battleroad3.html:
"We were engaged in what we call "street fighting"––we line up two by two or four by four, or however many abreast we can; the front row fires on the enemy, then turns and runs to the back of the column to reload."

So either it's a multi-era reenactorism, or a legitimate Rev-war tactic that's crept into the CW hobby by mistake, or a legitimate CW tactic that's crept into the Rev-war hobby as a mistake, or a tactic that historically spanned at least 90 years. I'll let you military tacticians figure out which.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top


RJSamp
Charter Member
164 posts Dec-29-02, 03:11 PM (EST)

39. "Correct Answer is HERE!"
In response to message #9

Bingo, Hank and Thanks! "Street Fighting" is a Rev War Tactic with Brown Bess Muskets. There is no equivalent in the manuals of the Day for American Civil War Soldiers. Scott's, Hardee's, US I & RT, Gilham's, Poinsett's, Cooper's, Casey's, et al. DO NOT have this tactic in their manuals.
The ACW period manual reference to street fighting by Column of Platoon, division, Company is SIMILAR to the Rev War Street Fighting Tactic...but it's NOT the same. The experiences of Fredericksburg pointed out the problems with the tactic in 1861 vs 1750-1815. Street fighting uses FOUR rifles per rank in a continuous firing mode to beat down enemy fire(s). Unfortunately this could be versus HUNDREDS of enemy rifles firing from covered positions, all with a clear shot at the column. And an Enfield / Springfield / Smoothbore missing the front rank will simply travel down the street and strike someone else farther to the rear....unlike a spent Brown Bess Ball. OUCH!

The use of the tactic in American Civil War reenacting is not PEC, BIRD, and should not be employed. They didn't use it, didn't drill in it, and didn't know about it to a large extent...and the actual use of it would have been Disastrous (like forming square against 12 pounder Napoleon's and 200 yard range breech loading carbines).

Would be MUCH better for us to spend our precious and few moments together to drill on Skirmishing, skirmishing by the bugle, and Firing on the Move SAFELY....none of these three unit skills are much in evidence amongst reenacting units today....save for a few that pride themselves on doing it authentically.

Period, period.

RJ Samp

RJ Samp



Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



Gary
Charter Member
29 posts Dec-29-02, 07:47 PM (EST)

40. "Remember one of Roger's Rangers Rules?"
In response to message #39

In his ranging instructing (still taught to U.S. Army Rangers today), Roger's insisted that men space themselves far apart enough such that one ball does not kill two men. The catepillar method mentioned earlier would have resulted in larger casualties as the minie ball retains much more energy than the round ball.



Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



tompritchett
Charter Member
744 posts Dec-29-02, 08:55 PM (EST)

41. "RE: Remember one of Roger's Rangers Rules?"
In response to message #40

With those tight column formations receiving fire from such close ranges, I could also see the very real possibility of single miniballs actually killing or wounding more than one soldier before being spent.
Thomas H. Pritchett
2nd SCVI




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



TheQM
Charter Member
201 posts Dec-23-02, 01:06 PM (EST)

8. "RE: Street Fighting"
In response to message #0

Tom,
This is a manoeuvre we've used for years, usually on constricted terrain, such as a road. The unit is in columns, and the first rank fires, then the first and second files break to the left, while the third and forth files break to the right and reforms at the rear of the column. The new first rank then fires, and falls back. We usually use this tactic in the retreat. Since, if the unit doesn't move forward, you are actually retreating one rank at a time.

I haven't seen this particular movement in the Drill Manuals, but I'm far far from an expert on this subject. I do know it's not rocket science, and I can't believe that this manoeuver wasn't used during the War, since it works so well.

Bill Rodman
K of P, PA





Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top


Columbia_Rifles
Charter Member
118 posts Dec-23-02, 01:01 PM (EST)

7. "How Common....?"
In response to message #0

I've seen and been taught various versions of "street fighting" and have never been too sure what was reenactor make-up and what was period. I have not read about "street fighting" in the manuals... I guess it's one of those things I need to study. However, considering the number of times I've seen reenactors showing off this maneuver, I've always wondered how often it was used. Yeah, I'm aware of some account of a regiment using it in some form at Chickamauga, etc. but just how common was this maneuver in actual battle? I suspect it was rare.
I've seen "street fighting" used a lot on those obstacle-course style Civil War "judged tacticals" where a company moves alone through the woods, encountering all type of Vietnam-style booby traps and VC-style civilians smuggling plans for "The Monitor" or some such nonsense. Anyway at some point these types of tacticals always have a spot where the intrepid company has to fight its way through an ambush, and I've often seen commanders resort to using "street fighting" on some forest trail to do this. I suspect that an actual CW company that encountered such a thing would have simply circled 'way around the force that blocked them. Skirmishers and flankers? Good gracious, what's that?!

Frankly, I'd think that a good, proper, working knowledge of skirmish drill--something that is depressingly rare in reenacting--would be infinitely more useful in those woodland tacticals rather than some silly form of "street fighting" where men fire (sometimes from the hip) and then "peel off" to the rear. It looks cool, but how common was this compared to simple skirmishing?


Regards,

Kevin O'Beirne
ColumbiaRifles@aol.com



Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top


KyBaccaFarm
Member since Dec-3-02
34 posts Dec-23-02, 07:11 PM (EST)

11. "RE: How Common....?"
In response to message #7

From my limited point of view, having one platoon hold their nose at one end of the covered bridge, while another platoon crosses the ankle deep creek, gets their feet wet, and then kick 'em in the tail on the other side of the covered bridge whilst using the playground furniture for cover is a much better idea.
Take a swim, Mr. O'Beirne. Ah, memories.

Fredericksburg? Still going to the wrong events? Still fighting around parked cars? Look, a DeSoto!

Ron Hasselette




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



Columbia_Rifles
Charter Member
118 posts Dec-24-02, 01:59 PM (EST)

13. "RE: Brush Creek"
In response to message #11

>>From my limited point of view, having one platoon hold their nose at one end of the covered bridge, while another platoon crosses the ankle deep creek, gets their feet wet, and then kick 'em in the tail on the other side of the covered bridge whilst using the playground furniture for cover is a much better idea.<<
Charles,

Yes, and it's how the average period company commander would have approached the problem at Brush Creek 2000 as well. "Street fighting" (this IS a thread on "street fighting") against an artillery piece would have resulted in annihilation in that particular instance.

By the way, if you're gonna post on this forum, try doing at least a tad bit to disguise your identity. Some of these games are getting a bit on the old side.


Regards,

Kevin O'Beirne
ColumbiaRifles@aol.com



Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



1stMaine
Charter Member
39 posts Dec-25-02, 10:18 PM (EST)

16. "A whiff of grape, Mr. Wilson!"
In response to message #13

Yup, nothing like a round of cannister from a 12lb gun to clear a street of pesky infantrymen. Heck, a howitzer will also do in a pinch..just load shell with no fuse so it bursts at the muzzle.
Now, artillery unsupported won't last long against determined infantry, espcially troops who are of no mind to take artillerymen prisoners after such a nasty introduction, but a pair of guns, placed hub to hub on a street, OUGHT to be able to fire by prolong enough to keep heads down, or blown off, as it were.
There's a GOOD reason why armies do NOT like to fight in built up areas. They become black holes that swallow up entire units. When at all possible, it's much easier to avoid the built up area and leave enough force to contain it and starve it into submission.
respects,
Tim Kindred
A Rowdy Pard



Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



KJAir
Charter Member
68 posts Dec-30-02, 11:40 AM (EST)

42. "Grape this!"
In response to message #16

Tim:
Fans of the "long arm" might be amused by the closing portion of the "street firing" drill in the ‘61/'63 infantry manual. It suggests that the mountain howitzer is just dandy for clearing the street, and without a lot of damage to property.

The fun never ends,

Kevin




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



tompritchett
Charter Member
744 posts Dec-26-02, 10:18 PM (EST)

26. "RE: A whiff of grape, Mr. Wilson!"
In response to message #16

The problem with artillery in streets is that their field of fire is too restricted. If they are not supported by some other troops to provide security, the artillery crews can easily be either sniped off by opposing troops firing from behind cover or flanked by opposing troops cirlcing behind houses to come in from behind. At one reenactment, I managed to lead a squad of three other men on just a flanking mission against an unsupported gun that had been wheeled into the street to fire on our parent unit's original position. Needless to say, our squad successfully captured the gun from the rear without having to use any "kelvar" armor; the gun never turned in our direction because of the masking of our movement by the houses and because of the continuing fire from the rest our company, which dove behind cover prior to the crew actually firing each time. However, I would fully agreed with you on the utter folly of marching down the middle of the street into the throats of enemy cannon.
Thomas H. Pritchett
2nd SCVI




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



Bill_Cross
Charter Member
254 posts Dec-26-02, 04:07 PM (EST)

23. "Stop making sense!"
In response to message #16

First of all, it's good to see you back posting here, Tim! You've forgotten more about the period than many of us will ever know. Hope to see you at McDowell.
The problem with these discussions is that we tend to approach them with 21st Century ideas about what makes sense and what doesn't. We forget that THEY had different ideas about how to fight, ideas not colored by Stalingrad or the Ia Drang Valley. If you read the contemporary authors (Jomini, Kautz, Mahan as I have been doing for the CW tactic seminar), you see that most authors of the period believed that unsupported artillery could not persist against even cavalry, no matter how withering its fire. They talk of artillery as a defensive weapon, though Napoleon had proven more than 50 years before that artillery could be used for shock effect.

Kautz came to see the weaknesses of artillery quite clearly, as his book is written with the WBTS behind him (while Mahan and Jomini are looking backwards at the Napoleonic wars and also the Mexican campaign in Mahan's case). The rifled musket had made unsupported artillery in the day before indirect fire not only less effective, but less independent. Your example of lining the street with cannons and firing by prolonge seems to me a modern concept, as urban fighting for the period would have been relegated to seige warfare (as McClellan planned to do at Richmond, never intending to storm the city, but to reduce it with his enormous guns).

In fact, some modern writers (Naisawald and Griffith for example) think that of all the branches of service in the CW, artillery was the least effective.

That is not to say that the writers or leaders of the period were correct in their thinking, just of the period. The bayonet had great, if unsupported, admiration by most military strategists and even field commanders of the period, some of whom wrote glowingly about "cold steel" even after they'd seen the chanel houses created by actual combat. We all realize now that bayonets were effective in the age of smoothbores, yet it's no insight to observe how generals of all periods sometimes continue advocating unworkable tactics long after the man in the field as discovered their unworthiness. Just look at Grant at Cold Harbor in our period: a man who had seen the charges fail at Vicksburg resorted to them once again back East.


Bill Cross
The Kearny Guards

http://www.kearnyguards.org/

wcross@BSLG.com



Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



1stMaine
Charter Member
39 posts Dec-26-02, 04:37 PM (EST)

25. "RE: Stop making sense!"
In response to message #23

Aw shucks, Bill, I guess I just needed another more public place to vent. Ah well.......
The use of artillery as I had metioned above was in keeping with the nature of the times, in that artillery often pressed into service in such situations as a stop-gap (leterally) measure when there wasn't enough infantry to go around. Many times a garrison force might be forced to depend on field artillery to help it defend an area when insufficient infantry is available. A somewhat similar example is the prolong of the 9th Mass battery on 2 July, 1863, from the Emmittsburg Road back towards Seminary rudge after the fall of the Peach Orchard. The gallant withdrawal, firing while prolonging, helped to slow down Barksdale's brigade, and buy time for infantry to come up and plug the hole.
Armies are, by nature, always prepared to fight the last war. Our own military is not alone in this, it seems to be a common effect, and has to do with the Army being controlled by veterans from the previous conflict. Just as Mexican War veterans rose to the top by the CW period, so to did the WWII vets become the top brass during Vietnam. The bombing campaigns against Germany and Japan were not at all effective against North Vietnam. Bombing a culture back to the stone age isn't effective when the target is already living there.
I would like to come down to the seminar, but we'll have to play it by ear. Keep up the good work, though. The only way that positive and effective change will come to our own hobbyist ranks is by the unselfish transfer of well-documented knowledge from one group to another. Fokks first need to know what they don't know, to start with, then they have to find out where to go to get that knowledge. That, and folks need to have that knowledge put into contect as well.
Heep up the fine work, comrade! Ho for the old 3rd Corps and the gallant General K.!
respects,
Tim Kindred
A Rowdy Pard





Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



KJAir
Charter Member
68 posts Dec-23-02, 01:33 PM (EST)

10. "RE: How Common....?"
In response to message #7

K O'B:
"...how common was this compared to simple skirmishing?"

Hmmm, I suspect the short answer is: not very.

Perhaps a better question would be: "(H)ow often did they fight in tight urban environments? "

I suspect the short answer would be: not very often.

For the action in Fredericksburg, accounts indicate that the Federals had to resort to some form of massed and rapid fire power; given that the Confederates were firing from cover, often at very close range. Conventional skirmishing would not have supplied the speed and massed fire to drive them out, as demonstrated by the large casualties in the early phases of the Federal assault.

As for the general point in skirmishing; indeed, it SHOULD be a common skill among "experienced" infantry reenactors; but alas, is not. Skirmishing would seem to be the answer to the situation you describe, since there would appear to be room to maneuver, even in woods. My sense is that the rapid high-volume "street firing" tactic is something one does only when one HAS to; i.e., Fredericksburg.

Non-specific but sincere seasonal sentiments,

Kevin Air





Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



Bill_Cross
Charter Member
254 posts Dec-26-02, 04:15 PM (EST)

24. "RE: How Common....?"
In response to message #10

>As for the general point in skirmishing; indeed, it SHOULD
>be a common skill among "experienced" infantry reenactors;
>but alas, is not.
Yes, and no.

According to the manuals and tactical writings, every regiment was supposed to have a company of skirmishers; indeed the introduction of the rifled musket was intended for the skirmishers if I'm not mistaken. And the notion of skirmishers is an old one (wasn't it Napoleon who spoke of "clouds of skirmishers" out front of his advancing lines?). One area where we seem to be weaker in is the use of skirmishers on the march. How many times have I seen a column of soldiers marching up a road with no advance guard, no flankers, no rear guard? I realize absolute numbers hinder this at campaign events, but it's certainly a goal we should work toward, in my opinion.

As the war moved on, skirmishing by all companies apparently became more widespread from what I have read (again, if someone has better information, please correct me). So strictly-speaking, we should all of us learn skirmishing tactics to have a complete impression, but field commanders would be well to know the tactics of the period of the war being recreated.

This is an issue we should raise at "West Point 1860": how widespread was the use of skirmishers as the war progressed.

Bill Cross
The Kearny Guards

http://www.kearnyguards.org/

wcross@BSLG.com



Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



Columbia_Rifles
Charter Member
118 posts Dec-24-02, 02:11 PM (EST)

14. "RE: How Common....?"
In response to message #10

K.A.,
My note on this sub-thread wasn't about any one instance of using "street fighting". I freely admit I'm not too well versed on the entire topic to discuss it in detail (I doubt there are few experts on this particular subject), but rather I was attempting to explore the commonality of "street fighting" in the Civil War, as opposed to how often it's seen in reenacting (quite a bit more often than it was really used, I suspect). Certainly it may well have it's proper place in depictions of actions such as Fredericksburg on 12/11/1862, or events that depict the fighting in Corinth, Mississippi or Hagerstown, Maryland (although I've not seen any events that portray the retreat from Gettysburg in the time I've been reenacting), or other in-town-fighting that occured in the war.

>>Skirmishing would seem to be the answer to the situation you describe, since there would appear to be room to maneuver, even in woods. My sense is that the rapid high-volume "street firing" tactic is something one does only when one HAS to; i.e., Fredericksburg.<<

On this we agree. Most reenactments depict some type of non-urban fighting (Mumford, NY aside). "Street fighting" is, to me, pretty inappropriate on a forest trail. I can't tell you how many times I've seen groups doing this schtick in tacticals from Rockton, Ontario to Wolcott Mill, Michigan to Brush Creek, Pennsylvania and others in between and beyond. I think it was our mutual friend Mike Lavis who first told me about some type of "street fighting" style of maneuver being done by some Federal regiment (15th Wisconsin, maybe?) at Chickamauga. Otherwise, I haven't heard of any instance of this being used in the war, particularly in open-field or woodland fighting.

For some reason skirmishing is a vastly misunderstood and misused tactic in reenacting. I've seen only a few times where it appeared to me that skirmishers were properly used at appropriate distances, including the Pickett's Charge scenario at 135th Gettysburg, the Sunday spectator battle demonstration at the Hodge March 2000, and on Saturday at Burkittsville 2001 (and I was with the skirmishers for the latter instance, instead of merely observing them from a distance).

"Street fighting" is cool-looking because it kind of resembles a Civil War tank, rolling forward and constantly firing. However, I'd opine that time spent teaching reenactors this probably-rare maneuver could be better spent teaching them proper skirmish drill (the reenactor variations I've seen on skirmishing over the years are many, to say the least), which is something that was VERY common in the Civil War and should be used more than it is in living history, as I'm sure you certainly appreciate.


Regards,

Kevin O'Beirne
ColumbiaRifles@aol.com



Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



ovi
Charter Member
38 posts Dec-23-02, 10:04 AM (EST)

6. "Advance Fire"
In response to message #0

Tom...from what you are describing, the tactic sounds like "Advance Fire". I dont remember the specifics but I believe it was used by Gen August Willich who had been an officer in the German or Prussian army before the war.
Five or so years ago (where do they go?) the 49th OVI used to showcase "Advance Fire" in the Western Brigade. Its a nice manuever and done right really keeps up a constant fire.
Kent Dorr
64th OVI
Army of the Ohio




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top


polishedrifle
Charter Member
58 posts Dec-23-02, 09:18 AM (EST)

5. "RE: Street Fighting"
In response to message #0

I have been involved with a unit which used the tactic before. I myself was wondering if it was a tactic used or something someone made up. But from the replies and post I see it isn't. Thanks

Brian Schwatka
72nd Illinois Co.A
1st Chicago Board of Trade Regiment




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top


Pogue_Mahone
Charter Member
82 posts Dec-23-02, 08:56 AM (EST)

4. "RE: Street Fighting"
In response to message #0

Tom,
Descriptions of street fighting in the Mexican War sound more like WWII stuff than muskets and cannons. Advancing thru the cities, the American army used whatever tactics they could to flank the Mexicans, including advancing in columns of platoons/companies with an alternating firing plan. Many of our Civil War leaders got their first taste of combat during this war.

Even Mahan's description of advanced skirmishers on a road sounds like modern tactics - men on the edges of the road with intervals between, taking care to go around blind curves, etc.

Of course, wars have been fought the same way for centuries. Politicians start wars under the guise of national pride, young men get excited and join the army, young men either get old fast or die, and the nation that wins rebuilds the loser in the image of the winner.

Pogue Mahone




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top


KJAir
Charter Member
68 posts Dec-22-02, 06:14 PM (EST)

1. "RE: Street Fighting"
In response to message #0

Tom,
First of all, thanks for the crowd control. The City did not provide crowd control tape this year, nor did they keep cars off Lewis St., where we did that fighting.

The technique you describe is a "Field Modified"/miniaturized version of "Street Firing," out of the '63 "Infantry Tactics" (p 391). That begins from a column of companies, with the platoons firing and peeling off to the rear. I have been told that the actual method we used, i.e., advancing by the flank ("fours") and having the front and rear rank men split off, is in some manual somewhere; but I can't find it in a quick check of Caseys' or Gillams.

As the Federal CO, I ordered it; so anybody who's mad about it....blame me.

BTW, we had hoped to make an initial assault in column of platoon, fall back, regroup and come again by the flank. We drilled in froming the column down at the City Dock, but I guess you guys had left by then. Given that there were cars in the street, we had to keep the front as narrow as possible; so we went to "Plan B:" the tactic you saw.

That's my story, and I'm stick'n to it.

Happy Holidays,

Kevin Air





Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top


tompritchett
Charter Member
744 posts Dec-22-02, 06:50 PM (EST)

2. "RE: Street Fighting"
In response to message #1

"As the Federal CO, I ordered it; so anybody who's mad about it....blame me."
Believe me I was not angry. I actually thought that it was quite innovative. I just was curious about the background behind the tactic. If I was a cat, I would have been long dead dead by now.

Thomas H. Pritchett
2nd SCVI
"Just Out of Curiousity" Mess




Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top



KJAir
Charter Member
68 posts Dec-22-02, 07:21 PM (EST)

3. "Fair enough...."
In response to message #2

...just don't ask me how to "from" a column.
(When is Szabo going to put a spell check on this thing anyway?)

(Grumble, grumble...bah humbug....)

CHEERS, ALL!

Da Bigmick

[Silas]

Here's the citation

Several references have been given for this but are any in a manual that was officially adopted by the War Department or the US Army?

U.S. infantry tactics. for the instruction, exercise, and manœuvres 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., United States. War Dept. This link takes you directly to the text on street firing in the scanned, online version of the 1861 U.S. Tactics as hosted by MoA.

[Masked Battery]

An 1864 reenactorism.

If y'all are interested in non-proscribed maneuvers...

"... in his frequent surprises of the enemy's skirmishers or pickets Major Wooten [18th NC] adopted a tactics [sic] of his own which was known in the brigade as 'Wooten's seine-hauling.' With the whole or a part of his command he would move by the flank in double ranks towards the enemy's line, taking advantage of all natural features, and sometimes the command would crawl until within easy running distance. Then they would quickly rush forward, Wooten would halt his command on the line of pits, and when the rear of his command reached him, he would order both ranks to face outward and wheel. Wheeling on Wooten as the pivot, they would return at a run at a single rank, empty every pit before them and never fire a gun.
"The Major was never as happy as when engaged in his 'seine-hauling'...."

Supposedly, this maneuver was used repeatedly at Petersburg without the loss of a single Reb.

The above comes from p. 210 in the section "Corps Of Sharpshooters-- Lane's North Carolina Brigade" in the book "Brief Sketches Of The North Carolina State Troops In The War Between The States."

[Noble Pelican]

Re: "Fire By Rotation" - Documented or Not?????

It is very interesting to view the great variety of comments concerning this particular manuever. To say that it wasnt done in a wholesale manner because it isnt in Hardee's or Scott's or Gilliam's or whatever is being a bit short sighted. Remember that America had a very popular system of militia that worked off of all sorts of manuals. It is not unlikely, in a battle situation, that officers and men trained in this style of attack would not revert to its use given a certain set of circumstances.
As to the comments on its regularity if advance and rear guards were deployed as per regulations, I would say that is too stringent. Some strange situations do happen from time to time where that would not apply. Case in point, Raymond, MS. For those of you that went, do you recall the sunken roads with not much space across except to fit the 4 files wide column? Alongside was a tree line and then an open field. Well, one day that weekend, our battalion was marching down the road and noticed a Federal battalion deploying in the field to our left through the tree line. Our colonel immediately ordered us through a break in the tree line and into a line of battle. As we deployed into a line, out of the corner of my eye, a Federal company of cavalry was coming at an angle across the field to an area through we just passed behind us on the road. They meant to come up the road to attack us from the rear. Being the rear company, I did have a rear guard posted, who almost simulatneously came running to me with the news of enemy cavalry on the road, as I had seen them myself. I immediately recieved permission to break off my company to combat them. The ONLY firing manuever to provide continuous firing due to the roads closeness together was the aforementioned one. The Yankees were surprised to say the least and broke off their attack. The topography lent itself to using it.
I havent seen three ranks deep firing manuevers on a battalion front used at a reenactment but I have seen references to it in original letters, particularly on Snodgrass Hill at Chickamauga. Nor have I recall reading anywhere of the use of about facing a battalion's rear rank to combat a Union unit appearing at our rear while firing on one in our front. But I made that call at a past Prairie Grove and sent the officers to the middle quicker than a fox on the run from the hounds.
Instead of immediate condemnation, some subjects deserve further review to enhance our knowledge. I think this one falls into that category and I thank everyone for their input.

[PogueMahone]

Re: "Fire By Rotation" - Documented or Not?????

As is noted in my post seen in Tom's copy from some other forum in days of yore, I think it is in a history of the 1st Tenn that they mention street fighting in Old Mexico. The 1st Tenn was a militia that was activated for Mexico and then again for the CSA. I recall reading somewhere that they used artillery to blast through walls to keep from going down streets the Mexicans were sweeping with fire.

As I have said before, and have been hammered for saying, the drill manuals we read like Bibles were actually textbooks used to teach military theory. Once you grasp the theory, you can experiment. Just because it is in the drill manual doesn't mean they followed it to a T and sometimes they did things "not found in a manual" (quote from P. Cleburne, reprimanding a junior officer).

[Silas]

Re: "Fire By Rotation" - Documented or Not?????

I am very interested in your work, and look forward to seeing it when it becomes available.

The compilation is now available: click here for more information about Guides Posts.