Artillery short sword

[marine05]

Re: Artillery short sword

I was speaking to an NSSA gunner and he mentioned another use of the arty short sword was to be used in assisting to spike the guns if neccesarry. It did not click right away and I did not think to ask. How in the blue blazes would one use a short sword to assist in spiking guns?

Good question, won't fit the vent and for field peices won't fit down the tube. Only use I can see is as a hammer, but another handy spiking device is the priming wire, insert into the vent, use the rammer to bend it inside the tube. Not impossible to get out, but will take the folks a little while to unspike.

s/f

DJM

[vamick]

Re: Artillery short sword

Good question, won't fit the vent and for field peices won't fit down the tube. Only use I can see is as a hammer, but another handy spiking device is the priming wire, insert into the vent, use the rammer to bend it inside the tube. Not impossible to get out, but will take the folks a little while to unspike.

s/f

DJM

Ive also heard of this method /but with the priming wire thru the worm then bent. Not un fixable, but real unhandy for the enemy

[Danny]

Re: Artillery short sword

Don't think for a minute that I discount the importance of a camp guard. It's a poor excuse of a commander who doesn't see to the establishment of one...

...There's a world of difference between having the assets available to provide for security and the assets available to make for a defense...

...According to Billings in the chapter titled "A Day in Camp," ... A detail of cannoneers stood guard over guns night and day... Sadly, Mr. Billings doesn't go into detail on how, or if, a guard detail was armed...

Mr. Forquer -

Please understand how we might think that you earlier post seemed to discount the importance of a camp guard.

Your differentiating between security and defense is a good point, as we typically would think these merely two levels of the same entity.

As to the the point that Billings didn't specify "...if, a guard detail was armed.." well the mystery can end right here - they were armed. Is there really any doubt about that?

Before we close the thread, I found in further research that the short artillery sword, besides being standard issue to the U.S. Artillery, was apparently also issued to U.S. Infantry as a stopgap measure before the war. I also found that when the French had the sword designed originally, it was specifically designed to be used by their field Artillery (Napoleanic era) for breach defense - the same intended purpose of the U.S. Army. (I guess it and the kepi came to be used in the U.S. Army essentially unchanged from French service!). And again, if the short sword was such an anachronism by CW time you wonder why it was newly minted right up to 1862, without a single significant modification from the original French pattern (only tang rivets added).

- Dan Wykes

[Danny]

Re: Artillery short sword

[QUOTE=Johan Steele;45288]Show me a pic, sketch or written reference to men of the Lt Arty carrying (personal weapons) and mayhaps my opinion of some on the modern Inf wannabes in the Lt Arty will be changed.[QUOTE]

Johan -

Artillerists as Infantry wannabes? You're kidding, right?

LOL

- Dan Wykes

[PFLINT]

Re: Artillery short sword

This is the same photo I just posted about that is in the "Photographic History of the Civil War"[/QUOTE]

The 8th Ohio National Guard photo is in the fourth volume of Photographic History of the Civil War in the section on prison camps and the photo of the '1st Ohio Light Artillery' in similar uniform is in the Time Life book First Blood.
Patrick Flint

[Forquer]

Re: Artillery short sword

Patrick -

Do you know if that image has been authenticated for when it was taken? I know that in the volume that was edited by Bell Whiley it claims that the image was taken at Johnson's. Just seems a little suspect. I'm thinking it's a pre-war image.

[PFLINT]

Re: Artillery short sword

Patrick -

Do you know if that image has been authenticated for when it was taken? I know that in the volume that was edited by Bell Whiley it claims that the image was taken at Johnson's. Just seems a little suspect. I'm thinking it's a pre-war image.

Yeah, I'm not sure if there is any more information on that picture. The 8th Ohio Battery National Guard served at Johnson's Island only during 1864 but if the picture is misslabeled-??? The pictures I mentioned have very similar backgrounds and the soldiers wear very similar uniforms, seemingly suggesting that they were taken around the same time or place which is somewhat disheartening when one is labeled as being taken in 1861and the other 1864.
Patrick Flint

[sedlakchristopher]

Re: Artillery short sword

The book I was referring to is "Civil War Album - Complete Photographic History of the Civil War" edited by William C. Davis and Bell I. Wiley.

The photo of the Ohio National Guard - 8th Light Artillery at Johnson's Island is on page 597 wearing the elusive short sword beside what looks to be an old 6 pdr?

[sedlakchristopher]

Re: Artillery short sword

Greg and Patrick,

My apologies for not checking the recent posts before re-posting the title of the book edited by Wiley.
Just back from vacation and wanted to make sure the title got posted since I didn't have it in front of me when I orginally posted.

As for my 2 cents....
The picture is screaming pre or early war...
1. The Shako's
2. The militia "battle shirts" of contrasting colors
3. Sure does look like a 6 pdr

I'm not saying these things preclude it from happening after 1861, BUT the resonable person would sure want to point to that time frame.

Chris Sedlak

[dclarry]

Re: Artillery short sword

Chris,

You have a lot of experience starting up and recruiting for a unit, Battery G. Would you like to see pistols and swords in your unit impression, and if so, with what prevelance? Is it something you thought of when organizing Battery G?

[Union Navy]

Re: Artillery short sword

Just to stick the Navy's nose in, according to McAulay, 500 model 1832 artillery swords were sent to the Mississippi Squadron in October of 1861 and 300 in February of 1862. It took a while for the 1861 model cutlasses to be sent westward, so the only "cutlasses" in the Mississippi Squadron were these artillery, short or "Roman" swords.

[Vuhginyuh]

Re: Artillery short sword

With Bob's post in mind;

Three CS made sword hilts have been found along the Cape Fear in recent years; two from Fisher, one from Sugar Loaf. Pictures of the later are forthcoming.

Examples were found with the hull of the USS Cairo. Can someone in the Vicksburg area run by the exhibit and confirm the patterns? http://www.nps.gov/archive/vick/cairo/weapons.htm

[ArtilleryNick]

Re: Artillery short sword

I've found this post to be rather interesting to read and at times rather informative. Personally, I've not come across anything that would suggest to me that I go out and buy one of the short swords. Number 1 because I've not seen anything that says it would be correct and number 2, there's no point in wearing something while working the cannon that'd only serve to get in your way. So far as marking cannon positions once you have that perfect shot lined up on target, that might just look pretty nifty. Personally, if I were on the rear of the cannon and about to be over run, I'd say the trailspike might just be a good weapon instead of the short sword.
And finally, with regards to the comment about artillery wanting to be infantry... ive seen infantry running away more times at reenactments than I have artillery :D

[Danny]

Re: Artillery short sword

....because I've not seen anything that says it would be correct... D

Nick -

And your take on the things that do say they were correct? i.e. They were made under Union contract until 1863, were standard issue up to 1873, exact copies were contracted by the financially-strapped Confederate states and issued to their ranks, they have been found as dug objects in CW battlefields East, West and South, and of course there is photographic evidence, if only scant, showing their use in light artillery.

Personally I can't make those things go away. If it weren't that our officers today are so bothered by it I feel it is rather appropriate to have a couple in camp or posed near the piece in battle. At least that's for up to mid-war scenarios, by which time everbody here feels there's some evidence the swords were considered "useless".

I do think they pose a hazard to wear them while servicing the piece during battle.

- Dan Wykes