Hardees Drill Manuals????????

[creed1939]

Hello, I have searched for this question but have come up shy of the answer. I am wondering if the Hardees revised Manual 1862 is correct as I have seen a copy that has the title Hardees revised 1862 and from other historical accounts.. or the like... later reviewing Hardees 1861/62 (drillnetwork) I found that there are a lot of differences in what related (mainstream) units do. After reviewing Hardees 1858 I see they do most things in accordance with this manual. However my question lies in which is correct for the Missouri Brigade late 1862-65 or period for troops in the AOT or even ANV for that matter? The only account of a drill manual is from 1861 with units from MSG of which was Gilliam's. ALSO the debate of the command REST.. which manual covers in place REST. or the fact that you do not have to say load after each time a unit fires? (unless you have been given independent fire(not fire at will) or fire by files). Many questions!!! Thanks for your patience!!!

[Clsinclair]

Re: Hardees Drill Manuals????????

OK, I just sold many of my original drill manuals but the order, "Load" after firing is a reenactorism. Loading after you fire is automatic in most cases. As for the 1862 revised Hardees I refer to it as the Southern Hardees because it takes into account the three band musket/rifle. Stacking arms is different from the 1858. Silas Tackitt will probably chime in and explain much better than I can. But I taught and preached the correct SOS, SOC, SOB, and even Brigade drill for almost 10 years. I can say that most people still don't do it correctly.

[10TnVI]

Re: Hardees Drill Manuals????????

in answer to your questions-as to loading-in Hardee's(the other manuals, with the exception of Scott's, are so similar as to be the same) Read School of the Soldier, Part II, Lesson IV, especially numbers 273-281 where loading at will is discussed.
Read School of the Company Lesson II, Article First-especially No. 47
As to Rest/In-Place rest-see School of the Company Lesson I, Article V, Nos. 30-41.
These should answer your question.
commanding load after firing is specified during instruction but No. 47 indicates it is not the method for battle.

[Silas]

Re: Hardees Drill Manuals????????

Hello, I have searched for this question but have come up shy of the answer. I am wondering if the Hardees revised Manual 1862 is correct as I have seen a copy that has the title Hardees revised 1862 and from other historical accounts.. or the like... later reviewing Hardees 1861/62 (drillnetwork)

Online text of manuals is okay, but you really ought to consult original manuals when you have a question about specific text. Go to my links page at http://www.zipcon.net/~silas/links.htm You'll find many to original manuals and books. You'll also find infantry booklets I have compiled from particular instructors. My booklets are secondary sources, but derive directly from original text and have citations to where text was obtained.

The original printing of Hardee's Revised is 1861 and was done in Mobile when he was stationed at Ft. Morgan. It bears the unique year on the title page of "First Year of the Confederacy." You can view a scanned copy of this manual on my links page.

I found that there are a lot of differences in what related (mainstream) units do.

That's because many reenactors who claim to follow the same manual often perform reenactorisms of what they learned rather than from actual instruction in a period manual.

After reviewing Hardees 1858 I see they do most things in accordance with this manual.

If you're talking about the schools of the battalion and company, the differences are hard to spot and are generally not significant. If you're talking about manual of arms, you're going to find differences. Other than manuals of arms, you're not going to find many, if any, differences in the remainder of the school of the soldier.

To see the differences in the pre-war manual of arms verses Hardee's Revised, pull down my booklets on the 1861 Manual of Arms for the Rifle Musket from the U.S. Tactics and 1861 Hardee's Revised. Lots of period illustrations to view and compare.

Off the top of my head, loading the weapon, handling the bayonet and stacking arms are different.

However my question lies in which is correct for the Missouri Brigade late 1862-65 or period for troops in the AOT or even ANV for that matter?

Hardee's Revised became the official manual for the gray side in early 1862. Gilham was still used, but was used less as time passed.

I rather like Gilham's manual for volunteers as it is the best single volume of relevant information available as it contains way more than just manual of arms and tactics.

The only account of a drill manual is from 1861 with units from MSG of which was Gilliam's.

Don't mix apples with oranges. Although both are round fruit which fall from trees, they are different entitles. The MSG is a product of its time and place. So is the Missouri Brigade.

ALSO the debate of the command REST.. which manual covers in place REST.

Not heard of such debate. Care to elaborate?

All the manuals cover In-place REST. It's reenactors who have complicated a simple method of relaxing without any prescribed manner of holding a musket into something like Parade REST.

or the fact that you do not have to say load after each time a unit fires? (unless you have been given independent fire(not fire at will) or fire by files).

I did not recall that. Sounds correct as there would be no reason to Recover ARMS. Will have to look at that.

Many questions!!! Thanks for your patience!!!

[thomas aagaard]

Re: Hardees Drill Manuals????????

As I read "No. 47" - It say that your soldiers should use the loading method "load at will" during combat.
the point is that you do not use "load in nine times" or "in four times", where you count the motions... but let the soldiers complete the loading in there own time.

It do not say that the order "load" should not be used doing combat.

[creed1939]

Re: Hardees Drill Manuals????????

Yes this is my point or understanding as of right now. I have not found were the command load is not used after firing commands unless after the command Fire by files.. at which time each soldier will use independent fire.. as I under stand it "Fire at will" Is a command to commanders to fire their unit at their discretion i.e. by company..rank..file etc. I could be wrong still reviewing revised manual.

[Silas]

Re: Hardees Drill Manuals????????

There is no Fire At Will command as you describe. Sounds like a local reenactorism. The term, fire at will, isn't even found in the schools of the soldier, company or battalion.

To understand firing commands as used in battle, the school of the battalion is a better source than the lesser schools.

Fire By File is a command in the singular, not the plural. It's File, not Files.

Still interested in the debate about the command of Rest.

[creed1939]

Re: Hardees Drill Manuals????????

Yes... my apologies I did make the command plural in my writing mishap on my part.,, ok my debate is: that for instance the command REST is given to give repose, at which time each soldier(recruit) will "will not be required to preserve silence or steadiness". It does not say you can Break RANKS. Now the command to resume lets say support arms, is Attention (preparatory) squad, platoon, or company etc. Now when used at events in my case they leave, sit down, and move out of ranks.. go relax etc. However why would you be able to do that when lets say at support arms?? If the command REST meant that you can leave formation why would it be used at support arms? My understanding of the command REST is that you do not have to keep your heel in place but still had to keep a general formation.. My point or issue is that we/us/them/those :) use rest as break ranks. Yes/no or have I utterly lost it?

In place—REST.

38. At this command, the men will no longer be constrained to preserve silence or steadiness of position ; but they will always keep one or other heel on the alignment.

39. If, on the contrary, the instructor should wish to rest the men without constraining them to preserve the alignment, he will command :

REST.

40. At which command, the men will not be required to preserve immobility, or to remain in their places.

41. The instructor may, also, when he shall judge proper, cause arms to be stacked, which will be executed as prescribed, school of the soldier.

[Scott Sheets]

Re: Hardees Drill Manuals????????

Wow, this is one cofusing thread right now. It seems we are all going in different directions.

As for firings.

There is no Fire at Will, as Silas mentioned there is a Load at Will. The only thing that comes close to the desired result of fire at will is Fire by File. To quote from Hardee's SOS, an excerpt from Fire by File

279. After the first fire, the front and rear rank men will not be required to fire at the same time.
280. Each man, after loading, will return to the position of ready and continue the fire.

So, if you desire your men to fire at will simply give the command to Fire by File. the result will be a well ordered fire followed by firing and the rates of each individual soldier.

As for the command LOAD after firing commands, it seems that all firings OTHER than Fire by File have this as part of their command. So I'm not sure why people think this is a reenactorism.

[Silas]

Re: Hardees Drill Manuals????????

I agree about the rests and wondered if that is where you were going.

Regarding In-place Rest, there is a preservation of the line by keeping one heel or the other on that line.

Regarding the Rest, it is a misunderstood command. To step away from the line would be to break ranks. The best understanding of the Rest is from Ellsworth's manual :

Rest.
Given at Ordered Arms or without [arms.]

[Para.] 290. At this command, the men may sit or lie down anywhere within one pace of their position in ranks.

So, the men don't walk off. They remain AT, but not necessarily ON the line.

When I command a company or battalion, I don't give the command to Rest because folks walk away. However, I will stack arms and break ranks. Stacking arms is a way to give the men rest and preserve the line.

[thomas aagaard]

Re: Hardees Drill Manuals????????

So, the men don't walk off. They remain AT, but not necessarily ON the line.

Baxter page 11-12.(but text copied from you article "rest, rest, rest and rest")
"REST.
At this, the recruit will not be required to preserve the steadiness of his position. Neither is he required to keep silent. If he leave his position, it should not be out of sight or hearing of his commanding officer, without permission. "

So in this version moving from the line is in my view allowed, other wise the limit on sight or hearing makes no sense.

Also"in place rest" give "the same freedom will be permitted except that no man shall leave his place"


So is this not actually a matter of the different manuals doing it differently?
Baxter limits the movement to "sight or hearing".
Ellsworth's limits it to only "one pace".

[Silas]

Re: Hardees Drill Manuals????????

Yup. That's from my article. Check the date on it. Must be ten to fifteen years ago. I've rethought this one over time. I am more inclined to believe in the Ellsworth method as it is more specific. Hardee and Casey are worthless :

39. If, on the contrary, the instructor should wish to rest the men without constraining them to preserve the alignment, he will command :

REST.

40. At which command, the men will not be required to preserve immobility, or to remain in their places.

Hardee's Revised, SoS 39-40.

In reading Hardee, I don't think it's all that different from the intent of Ellsworth. For In-place Rest, alignment is preserved by having one foot or the other on the line. By the command, Rest, neither foot is required to be on the line. By moving slightly away, mobility has been granted and the alignment is pretty well lost, but not completely as they are still at their ranks. The men are not aligned, but some semblance of ranks remains. To have the men scatter would be to break ranks and lose all semblance of ranks.

Bear in mind that the specific text in Ellsworth is written after the above general text in Hardee. Ellsworth added specificity because there is room for confusion. We're discussing this very problem a hundred and fifty plus years later, right?

As for Baxter, the impression I get after reading it many times over, is that he is consistent with the Ellsworth idea. A soldier can only leave his position WITH PERMISSION of his commander. So, if he doesn't have permission, how far away is he? Oh, about a step or so. This puts us right back to Ellsworth.

To avoid controversy, I stack arms and break ranks whenever the alignment is going to be compromised. The only problem I see with that is that too many people in ad hoc companies are not sufficiently skilled in stacking arms in whatever manual is used for that event. Some are too new to even stack in any manual.

[thomas aagaard]

Re: Hardees Drill Manuals????????

I do read in the drill books myself,(in this case I did find my pdf of baxter and found the text, but since I can't copy the text I got it from your site) but I got to say, that I usually take what you write as to be correct... and tell others to go to your site it they want to read more about drill, so if I may suggest that you remove or update the article?

No reason for me to get others to read articles you no longer agree with.

And I can only agree with stacking arms, at least with the groups I know of here in Denmark or Sweden.

[creed1939]

Re: Hardees Drill Manuals????????

Silas and others.. Thank you for clearing what I thought to be true. As far as firing I was saying that the command LOAD after each time was in debate myself noting the manual and others questioning it/ or rather me questioning it after reading the manual.. Again was just getting clarification on that.

Silas.. thank you so much for the help with REST.. it is refreshing to be able to bounce the question off of someone who has done much research in the area.

Now here we go... is there a command for the BN CMD to hand over the company to the CO CMD, or is it much like a warning as in right/left face when you do not wish the element to double in 4 ranks/columns?

Also looking into CO (Company) CMD (Commanders) having to echo Preparatory (Supplementary) commands from BN (Battalion) CMDs such as:


Battalion ( BN CMD).... Company (Co CMD)... Fix BAYONETS (BN CMD) and then it would be executed.. or right shoulder shift BN CMD.. CO CMD would echo then BN CMD would give command of execution. ARMS at which time the entire BN would go to Right shoulder shift.

Now is this correct or not echoed by the CO CMD or are the CO CMD directed to have their CO fix Bayonets etc?

From your site article on reenactorisms.. same applies to BN/Company? "As noted in Coppee's Field Manual of the Evolutions of the Line (Lippincott & Co., 1862), the prepatory command by the commanding general for his brigade to order arms is merely, "order arms." To stack: "stack arms." Nothing is mentioned about fixing bayonets, but logic dictates a similar result. The colonels echo each of these commands individually. For example:

General: Order Arms. Colonel: Order Arms.
General: Stack Arms. Colonel: Stack Arms."


Annndddd. Present Arms while at shoulder ARMS with left hand across body. I notice in your article on reenactorisms no mention of such. However you do mention the term "on parade". Is this style of present arms found some where for when not on parade? I have not found it in Hardees 1861 yet.

[creed1939]

Re: Hardees Drill Manuals????????

Any thoughts on my last post?