"ACW Infantry with rifles on wrong shoulder" Topic

Guys,

Sorry to appear lazy but I picked up from another thread a debate about a certain manufacturer who's figures had their muskets on the ‘wrong' shoulder.

I started to discuss it with guys in my local group but could not recall all the detail.

Now I can't find which one it was all about and suspect this may have been a spur off the main topic, can anyone point me to the right place or tell me what it was about?

Thanks

Definitley the wrong shoulder?
If it was from a photograph could the image have been reversed?

It was a discussion about the new Baccus 6mm ACW line having the infantry figures marching at what appears to be "left shoulder arms". The problem being that there was no such position in any US manual at the time, the closest being "support arms" which is an odd position where the rifle is held on the left side of the body with the lock wedged into the crook of the elbow.

Left shoulder arms was (and still is) a British army practice, and its possible that either the designer didn't know it was a European thing or he didn't consider it important enough to sculpt them differently.

The Union troops had the rifle on their right shoulder for both "Shoulder Arms" and "Right Shoulder Shift".

Many Rebs followed their own drill manual that used their left shoulder for 'right' Shoulder Shift. Shoulder arms was the same, on the right shoulder.

The position of shoulder arms which has the piece on the left shoulder and the hand on the butt is used in the older manual of arms for the musket. Gilhams uses this one but this manual was not used by the Federal Army by the time of the war. This position of shoulder arms has its origin in the close-order drill associated with linear warfare, and is the common position of shoulder arms for line infantry armed with smoothbore muskets in virtually all western armies in the 18th and early 19th centuries. All of the sources of which I am aware utilize this particular carry only for the musket; other long-arms (rifle, rifle-musket) are given a different position of shoulder arms.

The position of shoulder arms with the piece on the right shoulder and the hand gripping the trigger guard is used in the manual of arms for troops acting as light infantry (Scott, Hardee); though Scott assumes such troops may be armed with muskets, Hardee assumes light infantry will be armed with shorter rifles. (Scott also stipulates that NCOs in line units are to use the light infantry carry.)

In the ACW the rifle-musket emerged as the dominant infantry long-arm, but during the first year of the war the smoothbore musket converted to percussion was the most prevalent weapon. For some time thereafter, both smoothbores and the newer rifle muskets coexisted in both armies. Hence, some tactics manuals from the first half of the war feature both manuals of arms (Gilham, US Infantry Tactics). However, by mid-war the rifle musket is prevalent, the musket manual of arms disappears from the tactical manuals, and infantry is only using the light infantry carry (Casey, Revised Hardee).

This shift in the position of shoulder arms is part of the larger evolution of infantry tactics from close to open order style of fighting: even those ACW manuals that feature the manual of arms for the musket employ Hardee's light infantry tactics for their evolutions, not Scott's; the evolution continues postwar in the various editions of Upton's Tactics.

So what is correct? Its all dictated by time, place, and the unit. Certainly by mid-war the light infantry carry is the only correct position of shoulder arms for Federal infantry (Casey), and the dominant one for Confederate infantry (1862 NC Revised Hardee).

Sean

"The problem being that there was no such position in any US manual at the time"

Yes there is. Caseys and I think Baxters manuals have a left shoulder arms position. The butt rests in the palm of the hand with the arm extended nearly straight down, and the stock resting on the left shoulder. I know for a fact that at least the regiments of the Iron Brigade used Caseys manual well into 63.

I believe that while on the march the soldiers would hold their musket in any kind of position that they had the strength to do so.

BOH,

Thanks for the clarification. I'm much more familiar with Hardee's.

Jeff

Thanks for that Guys.

I wonder if they got confused with Support Arms, as opposed to Sholder Arms? That's shown in the 1863 US Regs as being on the left side as 74EFS Intel says.

Both Baccus and Adler use this positon through out their Napoleonic ranges.

"I believe that while on the march the soldiers would hold their musket in any kind of position that they had the strength to do so."

That is not entirely true. You are referring to "Route step". This is an order given that allows soldiers to NOT keep in step, talk freely amongst themselves and they are not required to maintain a particular rifle position. This does not mean they can carry the rifle in 'any' position they want. The barrel must always be up and not Trail arms for instance or that might cause an injury to others.

All I know is that the never-ending discussion over a detail I might never have otherwise noticed may have saved me from buying into the otherwise fantastic Baccus ACW line. Thanks! (I think) ;)

Its not very clear but the ACW figures in the photos at the Baccus web site seem to be at support arms. Support arms is where the lock of the musket is near the left arm pit and the left arm passes below the hammer with the left hand resting (depending on the drill manual) at the chest.

i also believe that the penraken range are all marching with muskets on the left sholder

jon

I always found it interesting that the Federal regulation "Hardee" hat were pinned up on the left side. This, as far as I can tell, was to conform to the left "shoulder arms" (as in the older drill manuals). Mounted troops, by contrast, pinned their hats up on the right (to allow free passage of the saber).

As Blind Old Hag has said, Baccus must have been attempting to represent "support arms". :)

I just looked at the range in question. Yes, sorry, should have done that first. Being a drill head I tend to jump on the opportunity to answer any manual related question.

As Blind Old Hag stated, the minis do appear to be at support arms. This position is consistent through all manuals. Go ahead…buy away!

Sean

First, I love Baccus figures and have a ton of them. Second, I have the older ACW figures and the marching figures have the weapon on the right shoulder, but not at right shoulder shift. Third, the new figures do look like they are roughly at support arms, although the left hand doesn't look like it is quite in the middle of the chest (more to the left.) Fourth, the new pose does appear to have the figures touching elbows (Yeah!) Fifth, Adler has ACW figures that are clearly marching at right shoulder shift. Sixth, I got a lot of the skirmishing figures by Baccus and decided to just do mostly firing lines.

Here is my complaint. Right shoulder shift is the most common march position for the Civil War. From a drill point of view it is distinctive to the peiod and it is a key part of all manuevers in the drill books by 1862. Period art work almost always shows this march position. If a manufacturer is to have one march pose for the ACW, I would ask please have right shoulder shift.

BOH, I can't find a left shoulder position in my copy of Caseys. Sean, I can't find my copy of Scott's but I agree with your description of the change from muskets to rifles. Baxter's manual does show it. Many of the manuals are now on line at various locations including

usregulars.com/library.htm

So it shouldn't be a show stopper to using the figures, but I was hoping in the update of the figures (as I do for all figure lines) that the drill positiions make it into the poses.

Battle Cry Bill

The position with the musket on the left shoulder and the butt in the plam of the left hand is definitely from Scott's (and Gilhams' which was based on Scott's). Even though Hardee (and later Casey) had supposedly superceded Scott long before the war, there were still some troops using Scott in the early stages of the war. Even some US Regulars were still using it. I once read a letter written by a Regular during the Peninsular Campaign. The widely scattered companies of the regular army were still being consolidated back into their regiments and the man commented that one of the newly arrived companies was still using Scott's old drill with the musket on the left shoulder. And this was with the war a year old.

U.S. Grant is reported to have commented when sent to reform an unruly Illinois regiment early in the war (and done that largely through unremitted drill) that even thought the drill had changed he had no trouble with using the older drill commands.