Artillery

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo!

Um... yeah. ;) :)



Curt

[Tyler Underwood]

Re: Artillery

These guys must be one of the most well drilled gun crews of the war because they obviously didn't spend any time learning how to dress themselves.:tounge_sm

[Jeremy Bevard]

Re: Artillery

What do you mean? I think they look fine.

So many things...pistols, swords, hats and more!

[Danny]

Re: Artillery

...so much for the reenactorism "artillery privates wouldn't have pistols" just because they were not "allowed" to have them, the official policy at the time being that only the cannon should be a last line of defense so the men servicing the cannon wouldn't abandon it (like they would if they had pistols). But that's ok -- at reenactments today it's officers that enforce the ban -- all the while condoning a ridiculous ratio of officers to ranks, hopelessly inauthentic.

Such inconsistency and inauthentic allowances should be ignored, like the artillerists in this photo seem to be doing. After all why should one reenactorism be justified by another one? Oh yeah -- and artillery privates would not have sabers either (except maybe the 1832 broad artillery sword in heavy artillery units, but which we are told by officers and venues that "nobody used at the time" -- and yet bck in the day records indicate those artillery short swords mysteriously continued to be issued, Southrons even making their own during a time of limited resource -- pretty weird for something "that nobody used."

I understand that posing for a photo may not represent what was allowed in the field, but then a lot of pistols and sabres seem to have been available...

[rbruno]

Re: Artillery

Curt,
Do you have a time period or theater of the war for this picture?
Great image

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Artillery

Hallo!

Sorry no.

In general though... NY 3rd Independent Battery, Mott's Artillery.

From New York in the War of the Rebellion, 3rd ed. Frederick Phisterer. Albany: J. B. Lyon Company, 1912"


"Battery originally Company D of the 2nd militia, later 82nd regiment of infantry. It served detached from its regiment and was known as Battery B, until December 7,1861, when it received it numerical designation.
Mustered out: June 24, 1865.

This battery was originally Company D — the howitzer company — of the 2d Militia, later 82d Infantry. It served detached from its regiment, and was known as Battery B, N. Y. Volunteer Artillery, until, December 7, 1861, it received its numerical designation from the State. It was recruited and organized in New York city and left the State, commanded by Capt. Thaddeus P. Mott, May 19, 1861. It was mustered in the service of the United States for three years, June 17, 1861, at Washington, D. C, and shortly thereafter detached from its regiment and converted into a light battery. At the expiration of its term of service the men entitled thereto were discharged, and the battery continued in service. It served at and near Washington, D. C., from May, 1861; in W. T. Smith's Brigade, Division Potomac, from August 4, 1861; in Hancock's Brigade, Smith's Division, Army of the Potomac, from October, 1861; in same brigade and division, 4th Corps, from March, 1862; in 2d Division, 6th Corps, from May, 1862; in 1st Division, 4th Corps, from September 15, 1862; in 3d Division, 6th Corps, from October, 1862; in the 2d Division, 6th Corps, from November, 1862; with the Light Division, 6th Corps, from April, 1863; in the Artillery Brigade, 6th Corps, from May, 1863; in the Artillery Reserve, Army of the Potomac, from July 10, 1864; in the Artillery Brigade, 6th Corps, from December, 1864, and June 24, 1865, commanded by Capt. W. A. Harn, it was honorably discharged and mustered out at New York city, having lost by death during its service, killed in action, 12 enlisted men; of wounds received in action, 2 enlisted men; of disease and other causes, 4 enlisted men; total, 18."

Curt

[Pennvolunteer]

Re: Artillery

Tidball on the Personal Armament of Batteries.doc

I love it, and the fact that some of them have the hat pinned on the left per regulation, and some pinned on the right and other evolutions. The Artillery Hardee we have in the FA Museum collection is pinned up on the right, not in accordance with regulations.

As for the arming, it is not consistent from unit to unit, but I'm attaching an article from here on the AC by John Tidball in 1905. Tidball, originally of the 2nd Artillery was a commander who served from battery commander up to Corps artillery commander. Great insights.

[Michael Comer]

Re: Artillery

Interesting Frank. Thanks for posting it.

- - - Updated - - -

It appears that the fellow on the left is sitting on thin air.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Artillery

Hallo!

I have some "suspicions" about the image, and would really like to see the original in the book.

I realize that the image had been reworked or "cleaned up," but some elements raise some doubts that things were (may be) manipulated or added via Photo Shop. For example, the head of the person sitting at the wheel hub as his head looks disproportionately small and the light source or illumination is "off," dress hats on heads, etc., etc.

Here is the presented (alleged/purported) original before "clean up." IMHO, it looks like the "cleaned up" image with an opaque layer over it:



Same for this camp scene of the same unit:





Dunno....

Curt

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Artillery

Funny, I thought that as well. Like he is 15/16 scale to the others...but why?

[thomas aagaard]

Re: Artillery

only one of the revolvers is in a holster. This I think indicate that the revolvers are not usually carried by the men who have them here.