Marching at the Route Step

[a_williams63]

At the Gettysburg national this year, I watched a column of infantry march by at the route step. Most of soldiers had slung their rifles with the muzzle pointing down. I ended up in a heated discussion with my lieutenant over the regulations concerning every soldier's favorite command.

Hardees instructs that the piece be carried 'At will' during use of the route step (308 School of the Company). The description for 'At will' reads: "carry the piece at pleasure on either shoulder, with one or both hands, the muzzle elevated." (219 School of the Soldier)

I'm not as familiar with the other major drill manuals. Is the practice of slinging rifles in a position approximating "Secure Arms" supported by another drill method or is it simply a product of sloppy drill and a failure to read the fine print? Or, from primary sources, was the command ignored in actual practice by veteran soldiers?

Respectfully,
Pvt. Austin Williams
10th Tennessee Volunteer Infantry (Irish)
Company D

[AZReenactor]

Re: Marching at the Route Step

Austin,
I agree that this can be an issue. Not only do men caryy muskets with muzzle down,more than once I've found myself looking directly into the (frequently loaded) muzzle of the musket of men in front or to the side who chose to rest their musket on the shoulder as though carrying a yoke of water buckets. In such cases I tend to take on the role of demoted NCO (when not playing NCO or officer) and correct the behavior immediately and aggressively.

My opinion, just opinion, is that this is probably a combination of a lack of training and ignorance of the regulations. For many reenactors route step seems to to suggest an end to the need to adhere to military drill, when in fact there are guidelines and requirements to be adhered to in this modified step just as there are in each of the other steps.

Civil War Regiments and companies are very much their own little kingdoms where the rules and guidelines actually practiced flow down from those of the highest rank who interpret and emphasize the parts of the manual according to their own understanding and training. The failure to follow the guidelines of the manual is largely a failure from the top down. Officers need to make certain they stress this little period safety guideline with their subordinates and that the NCOs are actively training and enforcing the dictate while at the route step on the march. Improper carrying of arms is one of the things NCOs should consciously remain on the lookout for when on the march not merely to comply with regulations, but to keep their men safe from injury.

"The most important duty of sergeant is that of file-closer, it is his duty to see the men pay attention to their duty, preserve order, march properly, and keep closed." August Kautz from Customs of Service

(BTW, as for the heated discussion with the Lt.; I hope that occurred following the event and out of character as anything else would be a violation of a whole other set of regulations that you should be adhering to while playing the role of infantry private.)

[Sean Wilson]

Re: Marching at the Route Step

Even at the Route step Saftey must be an issue !!!!!!!!!!!

Sean Wilson

[Greg Barnett]

Re: Marching at the Route Step

Rains62 or whatever you name is, (ha ha)
I will tell you before someone else does. You must sign your full name on each post. This is part of what you agreed to when you registered. I thought you might rather hear it from me, your pal and good buddy, right.
Later,
An no you can't have my hat!! Not yet anyway.

[Silas]

Re: Marching at the Route Step

Seen that one before : http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/...te+step+muzzle

[DougCooper]

Re: Marching at the Route Step

"At the Gettysburg national this year..."

Austin - part of your answer lies in the above context. Silas and Troy pretty much cover the rest.

[RedState]

Re: Marching at the Route Step

I had this discussion with my captain and it was determined for our company that route step constituted supporting your rifle with the muzzle elevated and route step should not be done while loaded. But, we also discussed that certain slings are meant to carry with the muzzle down.

I personally enjoy right shoulder shift.

Ken Tomlinson

Pvt.
14th Tennessee Infantry, Archer's Tennessee Brigade

[Silas]

Marching at the Route Step

- "At the Gettysburg national this year, I watched a column of infantry march by at the route step."

I must admit that I cringed when I read this line the first time. Then, I let it go. Not able to leave it alone any longer, I must state the reasons why this gets me. You didn't watch a column. You watched folks marching by the flank at route step, not in column. You're talking about the so-called "column of fours." The term is something I've not seen mentioned in any of the regularly used manuals. I have found it mentioned in a little noticed manual published in 1865, but that's the only one.

The method that soldiers marched was in a column of companies. Reenactors tend to think of it as a manoeuver where a cadence is required, but that's not the way it was contemplated in the manuals. In the remarks about marching in column, you'll find this passage :

193. Although the uncadenced step be that of columns in route marches, and also that which ought to be habitually employed in the Evolutions of the Line, because it leaves the men more at ease, and, consequently is better adapted to movements on a large scale and to difficult grounds, nevertheless, as it is of paramount importance to confirm soldiers in the measure and the movement of the cadenced pace, the route step will be but little practiced in the exercises by battalion except in going to, and returning from, the ground of instruction, and for teaching the mechanism and movements of columns in route.

See, Hardee, SoB 193 at this link. Casey-ites don't get off the hook easily as the same passage is found in his SoB at para. 233. Casey adds the extra paragraph in the same topic which says :

232. The subdivisions of a column will not maintain the full distance, for any considerable length of time, unless in the route step, or upon reviews or other movements of ceremony. In presence of the enemy, the column will habitually be either at half distance or closed in mass.

It's the "unless in route step" language which further assists the argument.

Point is that reenactors march by the flank at route step even in open fields when they ought to be marching in column. See, Hardee's paragraphs about the column in route beginning at SoB 198. You'll find similar paragraphs in Casey beginning at 239 SoB. When passing through a narrow defile, there's a need for a small front. Once that defile is passed, there is no reason to maintain the small front.

Para. 198 states the golden rule : A column in route, like a column in manoeuvre, ought never to have a depth greater than about the front it had occupied in the line of battle, less the front of a subdivision. See also, Casey SoB at 239. Marching by the flank at route step causes a huge accordian effect which does not occur when marching in a column of companies.

When the troops are strung out in a long line, it takes longer to form the battalions. A little extra time could be the difference between winning or losing the day. If this is how soldiers marched, shouldn't we if we're trying to reenact how they marched? Authenticity in marching. Who'd a thunk?

[hiplainsyank]

Re: Marching at the Route Step

Considering that many roads the armies would have marched in would have been flanked by fencing on both sides, or often enough had woods on both sides, how much could they really have marched in this formation?

[Silas]

Re: Marching at the Route Step

Considering that many roads the armies would have marched in would have been flanked by fencing on both sides, or often enough had woods on both sides, how much could they really have marched in this formation?

Whenever space allowed is the easy answer. Gettysburg is always a fun place from which to argue. Here's Maj. Gen. McLaws' paper about the Battle of Gettysburg as published in Vol. 7, Southern Historical Society Papers, 64, at 69-70 (1879) :

After very considerable difficulty, owing to the rough character of the country in places and the fences and ditches we had to cross, the countermarch was effected, and my troops were moving easily forward along a road with fences on the side not giving room enough for a company front, making it necessary to break files to the rear, when General Longstreet rode up to me, and said: “How are you going in?” and I replied, “That will be determined when I can see what is in my front.” He said: “There is nothing in your [70] front; you will be entirely on the flank of the enemy.” I replied, “Then I will continue my march in columns of companies, and after arriving on the flank as far as is necessary will face to the left and march on the enemy.” He replied, “That suits me,” and rode away. My head of column soon reached the edge of the woods, and the enemy at once opened on it with numerous artillery, and one rapid glance showed them to be in force much greater than I had, and extending considerably beyond my right. My command, therefore, instead of marching on as directed, by head of column, deployed at once. Kershaw, a very cool, judicious and gallant gentleman, immediately turned the head of his column and marched by flank to right, and put his men under cover of a stone wall. Barksdale, the fiery, impetuous Mississippian, following, came into line on the left of Kershaw, his men sheltered by trees and part of a stone wall and under a gentle declivity. Besides the artillery firing, the enemy were advancing a strong line of skirmishers and threatening an advance in line. I hurried back to quicken the march of those in rear, and sent orders for my artillery to move to my right and open fire, so as to draw the fire of the opposite artillery from my infantry. I will here state that I had in my division about six thousand, aggregate — which, I think, is over the mark.

So, here's an instance where a division is marching to battle, along a road and is marched in column of companies during a well known march at a well known battle. The initial comments in McLaws' paper about breaking files to the rear is something found in the school of the soldier. It's a method of marching in a column - by company - and reducing the front by as much as the size of a platoon. I have yet to see this performed any reenacting company. I'm not saying no one has done it. I just haven't seen it or noticed anyone talking about doing it. This nifty manoeuver would be done to pass a defile. Once the defile is passed, the broken ranks return to their prior places in the company after the commander so orders. Essentially, they return to the company formation instead of remaining in the morphed formation where some files march by the flank behind the unbroken files of the company.

Even in a wood lined area, you're going to have an advanced body out front in skirmish order tramping through the brush as well as flankers on either side of the main body of troops. Skirmishers and flankers act like a big trip wire.

Want more instances? Perform a search in the O.R.'s for "column of companies." Better yet, just click on this link for the results of such a search.

Here's something chosen at random from the provided search :

HEADQUARTERS FOURTEENTH NEW YORK VOLUNTEERS,
Camp at Gaines’ Mill, Va., May 29, 1862.

SIR: About 4 p. m. on the 27th instant the regiment under my command had the honor to engage the enemy near Hanover, in this State.

We were under the immediate command of Brig. Gen. George W. Morell, and under his directions marched in column of companies, left in front, through the field 600 or 800 yards from and in front of the enemy, who had a strong position, with a large force, in the woods, and who were preparing to charge on the Forty-fourth and Twenty-fifth New York and the Second Maine Regiments, thereby endangering a battery placed in a field near them.

As soon as my regiment had advanced pretty well in the field I ordered them to right-wheel by companies, and then changed front forward on the sixth company, after which I hurried forward and engaged the enemy so warmly that they were compelled to fall back, soon after which I received orders to “Cease firing,” to allow one or two regiments of our brigade to charge the enemy’s left flank. I was then ordered to support Griffin’s battery, which I continued to do until dark.

I take pride and pleasure in stating that both officers and men under my command behaved with admirable courage and coolness during the entire battle.

Who says complex drill isn't done in battle with "pride and pleasure" and "with admirable courage and coolness"? The random selection isn't in a route marching situation on or along some road, but if you look you'll find some.

Flank marches take too long as the length of the body of troops is elongated unnecessarily. Marching in column of companies is a way to keep troops within supporting distance of each other with the least amount of effort. Here's a hypothetical for you to illustrate what I mean.

Visualize a battalion of six companies in battle line. Face them to the right. March them a hundred yards. Halt them and imagine how long it will take for the tail of the dog to reach the body. The only way to keep the troops from elongating is to continue a cadence. Even then, some elongation will occur. It's hard to march any distance in cadence. Now, visualize that same battalion in line of battle. Each company wheels to the right by company. March them a hundred yards and halt them. The battalion will be the same length in column as was the width of the original battle line. To maintain the distance, the men are not required to be in cadenced step as by the flank. They can be at route.

Paragraphs 198 through 23o of Hardee's SoB create a pretty solid framework for how battalions on the road ought to march. Instead, reenactors just march by the flank regardless of how elongated and unsoldierly the battalions become. There's more to authenticity than mere uniforms and camps. This is one of those things.

[a_williams63]

Re: Marching at the Route Step

Thanks for the correction concerning columns verses marching by the flank, Silas. I think I've probably read that section of Hardees six or seven times without realizing my (as well as my company officers') mistake . It's the little slip-ups like that us newbies come to this forum to correct. I appreciate it.

And for my court martial defense, I was acting as a brevetted company Sergent at Gettysburg. And we won't even get into some of the other things that made me cringe at that event.

Very respectfully,
Pvt. Austin Williams
10th Tennessee Volunteer Infantry (Irish)
Company D

[RJSamp]

Re: Marching at the Route Step

So Silas are you saying that HETH on July 1st and HOOD MCLAWS on July 2nd marched for 10+ miles in Column of Companies? Or did they march at the route step in 4's for miles on end and only ploy into a column of companies/divisions in the last few miles?

We know that Federal I Corps formed column of companies within a half mile of Herbst Woods/McPherson's Ridge....they were in 4's for miles prior to that. Same with the VI Corps during their forced march....they ployed into regiments as they neared Little Round Top.

The BIG Vermont Regiments did very nicely in a Column of Manuever ploying back and forth on July 3rd. Confronting Kemper, flanking Garnett/Armistead, gobbling up the Floridian's.

On July 2nd, 1863 Caldwell's entire Division ployed from a column of Brigades facing West, marching by the left flank facing south and ploying into line reversed (rear rank in front) near the Wheatfield. In essence they were 4 columns of 4 marching by the left flank, 1 regiment following the other in 4 brigade lines.

The key is knowing your terrain.....defiles, obstacles and LOS/LOF to the enemy work against forming columns of companies/divisions, et al....and the need for a collected and organized body of men near the battlefield works in juxtaposition to men moving at the double quick in a column of 4's for long distances.

[Silas]

Re: Marching at the Route Step

I'm not saying what Heth's Division or either of the divisions of Hood or McLaws did on the second day. As far as the specific example is concerned, you'll have to apply McLaws' words to the situation noted in his paper. I will repeat that the preference for moving troops was column of companies, not by the flank. See the passages I've cited from Hardee and Casey. You'll see what I mean.

Just because reenactors only seem to march by the flank at route step does not mean that it's the only method of marching in route. As odd as it seems, marching in column of companies need not always be at a cadence. When Hardee and Casey prefer marching to be done in column of companies, why do we march by the flank?