"Nice Period Photo of Union Artillery" Topic

Stumbled across this one so I thought I would share.

Get out there and make your lead men dirty boys – this crew would certainly not pass a 'white glove' test! :o)

link

Did someone say mud ?

One of my favorites.

Nice Parrots.

Thanks, Trajanus. Never seen that one before. Those loaders look pretty tough. That must have been one of the more dangerous jobs.

A couple of comments/observations:

1.) Note, on the first image, the stains on the trousers of the loaders, and the blackness of the sponges. Those stains are from the water used to swab the bore between each round. It comes out black from fouling, and stinks like rotten eggs. The sponges actually, aren't sponge. They are sheep's wool covers that are fitted over a wooden end and tied off to hold them in place. Each one has a few spares to change out as they get worn down. Also, the water bucket used has a leather cover with a hole in the top to act as a sort of squeegee to ring out some of the water as the sponge is withdrawn. That way, you get enough to kill any embers left in the breech, but not so much that you run out of water too quickly.

2.) On the pic of the Parrots. Note the haversacks and knapsacks, etc on the limbers for the crew walking alongside each gun. Normally the men would carry these, especially their own canteens and haversacks, but on longer marches the men were permitted to attach their knapsacks to the limbers and caissons, so many to each, provided that they didn't overburden the teams. When going into action, the men would sling their knapsacks down by their positions so as to free up the limbers, caissons, etc.

Nice pics. Thanks for posting these!

Thanks, TKindred. I noticed those dark stains on the trousers in the first photo and had wondered if there was anything unusual about that.

Did the men of the artillery crews walk or ride when on the march ? I ask cause in the second photo I've always thought they looked like they were getting ready for the command "mount up" and "move out" so to speak.

PS Captions I've read for the 2nd photo put it on the Peninsula in 1862. 20 pound Parrots. I bet those same guns pounded the Rebs at Antietam… and I would think Malvern Hill as well ? Also, the horses look larger by ACW standards.

20 lbs. Parrots are nice… unless they burst. :)

Don

actionfront.blogspot.com

"Who ever saw a dead cavalryman?"

"….on longer marches the men were permitted to attach their knapsacks to the limbers…."

b-but surely everyone knows that two wheeled cart between the guns and the horses is for seated gunners to ride on; a place where you can relax with a pipe, put an arm around your buddy, point at the scenery or encourage the drivers with a whip!

In the first photo I also notice what looks to be similar staining on the inside of the wheels. Also, note how the front of the wheel on the first piece appears to be pressed up against a rock or stump or some kind of forward barrier (even on both wheels)…marking original position and allowing gun to be rolled forward with accuracy after recoil ? With the 2nd photo, I thought the problem with the 20 lbers were defective carriages, particularly at Fredericksburg? Or did all Parrots have "bursting" problems?

"a place where you can relax with a pipe, put an arm around your buddy, point at the scenery or encourage the drivers with a whip!"

Don't forget, take a snooze while the infantry is marching by or call out to the lead rider "Are we there yet!?!"

Or hold on for dear life while speeding over bumpy ground!

Every artillery man should ride on a limber – - Once.

It certainly doesn't look like anyone plans on riding the limbers in that photo.

Other observations:

Why artillery crews suffered fewer people casualties ?

link

AoP at Cumberland Landing, VA. It looks like a cavalry encampment in the middle distance. Though the horses are blurred, they do appear to be group by squadron? Notice the whites… perhaps I should say, greys ?

link

"Or did all Parrots have "bursting" problems?"

Yes. It wasn't so much a carriage problem, at least not to the gunners. Bursting was the concern most prominent to the minds of the artillerymen themselves. They had a round-about number of the rounds that were 'safe' and over that line was asking for trouble. Many Parrots were retired when they went over that amount of firings for fear of bursting. Miscount at your own peril. :)

As far as riding on the boxes… all you have to do is read accounts of the artillerymen themselves and you will be horrified by the amount of deaths and serious injuries. There were no springs on limber chests. Even on smooth ground men got bounced off the chests and then run over. Why they would even risk it is beyond me.

Also, the water bucket used has a leather cover with a hole in the top to act as a sort of squeegee to ring out some of the water as the sponge is withdrawn.

Nice detail Tim.

If you look closely at the bucket in the centre of the photo you can make out something like that on the top.

TK: have dipped many a sponge in a water bucket over 21 years as a reenactor and working guns for the NPS and have never seen the leather squeege adapter you mention. Have browsed through my library for more information and cannot find any reference. Please, I do not doubt your information, just encountered something new. Can you furnish more information?

Never heard of the leather cover either. Are you saying one of these should have a leather cover?

link

Now that's interesting. What you can see in my original photo could just as easy be a lid!

Particularly interesting as I've not seen a bucket with a lid to begin with!

"As far as riding on the boxes… all you have to do is read accounts of the artillerymen themselves and you will be horrified by the amount of deaths and serious injuries. There were no springs on limber chests. Even on smooth ground men got bounced off the chests and then run over. Why they would even risk it is beyond me."

It called following orders!

I did it for a number of years as a reenactor and never had a problem of being bounced off the limber chest.

But if you want to have a great ride, you ride the gun tube.
Definitely a "E Ticket!"

Either a metal or leather lid would make sense to minimize water sloshing out especially when hanging under a moving carriage. I can imagine one or the other breaking off, wearing out.

Following are from the LoC:

No riders on limbers, Batt. M, 2nd US… it looks like a battery of regulars turned into horse artillery ?

Robertson's battery of horse artillery, no riders on limbers

Limber riders, 17th New York

If they had the extra horses, perhaps they mounted the crews on those. Since guns needed horses to be moved, I would think a battery commander would make it a point to have extra horses on hand, to have a reserve to replace the one's he knew he was going to lose and to give his crews a better and faster way to move with the battery Otherwise, I would suspect if they needed to get somewhere fast, the crew might have been ordered on to the limbers as 11th ACR pointed out. In general, they do seem to have avoided riding the limbers where possible.

The water buckets, like the grease buckets, were metal and had removable metal lids. The water bucket has a metal top surface with a hole in the middle to pass the sponge through. This had a leather rim fitted onto it (it covered both sides on the lid) which acted as a sort of squeegee for the sponge. These are almost non existent on surviving buckets due to the vagaries of age and useage.

I'll see if I can locate the relevant section in the Ordnance manual that describes them.

V/R

OK just to confuse the issue, the US Army had two kinds of field artillery: Mounted Artillery (meaning the guns were on mobile field carriages) and Flying Artillery (aka Horse Artillery to the rest of the known universe), in which every cannoneer was provided with a saddle horse for rapid movement. Batteries changed role frequently, but regular army outfits were most often assigned as Flying Artillery because all their recruits were taught to ride, unlike some of the volunteer batteries.

Patten's 1864 manual says: In the mounted batteries, formerly called foot -artillery, the cannoneers are on foot, and. remain so during the manoeuvres of the battery, except when it is desired to move at a very rapid rate, when they are mounted on the ammunition boxes.

Now apply a little common sense here; if you permit two men to ride the limber, you add around 250 pounds extra dead weight your horses have to pull. To accommodate that, you need to lighten the load i.e. the ammunition you carry… so it's not going to be something that is done routinely. And if you order the crew to mount the limbers how are you going to get the Gunner(cpl), Chief of Piece(sgt),and all six cannoneers up there? (Those three guys up front are Drivers).

Maybe the manual assumes that by the time you need to do this your ammunition is gone and most of the men are already killed…..!

Limber riders:
link

And from the Battle of Gettysburg Panorama.
link
link
link

11th ACR

You have provided links with staged photos and the Cyclorama which is not very accurate to say the least.

They could squeeze three guys on the limber. There's also the caisson with limber to sit. Plenty of extra room there.

As far as wearing horses out, remember the Confederates used only 4 horse teams.

And an entreprising commander of a state battery might unofficially turn his command into a flying battery or an entreprising army commander might make sure as many of his batteries were flying as possible. And over time wouldn't volunteer artillerymen/gunners learn how to ride horses? What if a driver gets shot ? Wouldn't they have learned everyone else's jobs over time making for greater inter-changeability ? Indeed an entreprising battery commander might drill his volunteers to be inter-changeable and perhaps the regulars were just way out front in that department.

avidgamer
"You have provided links with staged photos"
But were not the majority of photos taken during the ACW staged?
From the mouth of Mathew Brady,
"Ok everyone, do not move for the next few seconds, and say cheese!!!"

"and the Cyclorama which is not very accurate to say the least."
Yes we all know the inaccurate's of the Cyclorama.
But it dose show them riding the limber boxes. If you have a choice of riding or walking in most cases you will ride.

In the military and during wartime, safety issues are sometimes over looked.
Can you show proof that no one ever, ever, ever rode on the limbers or caisson?

If you enlarge the last photo I posted, you'll see artillerymen riding limbers, 3 per. Granted that photo was probably staged.

link

The above was a battlefield sketch I believe (scroll down).

"But were not the majority of photos taken during the ACW staged?"

Yes but you can't look at photos of that time to judge how, why they deployed and fought. Everyone wants to get in the picture so they will make sure they are all in the shot if they can. Sticking them on limber chests makes a nice picture to send home to Mom. :)

"But it dose show them riding the limber boxes."

That and 44 cents buys you a stamp. ;)

"If you have a choice of riding or walking in most cases you will ride."

NO, not me!!! I've read too many accounts of them doing it and 'no thanks', I'll walk. I'd rather not have my legs, arms or skull crushed. I should start recording the incidents on my blog. It can get gruesome pretty fast.

Don

actionfront.blogspot.com

"Who ever saw a dead cavalryman?"

"NO, not me!!! I've read too many accounts of them doing it and 'no thanks', I'll walk. I'd rather not have my legs, arms or skull crushed. I should start recording the incidents on my blog. It can get gruesome pretty fast."

Then I guess you would be the first one to receive Company (Battery) Punishment for refusing a order to get your gold bricking rear end on the limber, as you are delaying movement.

Bottom Dollar: Half right there, as drivers and musicians were trained to serve the guns, however there's a HUGE difference between riding a saddle horse and driving a gun team.

"If you have a choice of riding or walking in most cases you will ride." The thing about the army – any army- is you don't get to choose

Not ACW but this photo shows why you don't want to be perched on that limber when it moves

Hey, at least if you are tied to the wheel you can't fall off! That's a bonus. :)

Man, I love you guys! This is the kind of topic where you get to the real heart of Civil War history.

Great stuff everybody, and I gotta say…

These artillery photographs for me reinforce the real truth behind the supposed "marked difference" in appearance between the eastern and western armies, that long-held notion of the supposed "spit and polish" of the AoP vs. the "frazzled looseness" of some of the western armies like The Army of the Cumberland, the Ohio, etc.

When you see field photographs like this, you understand that life in the field was simply dirty, dusty, stained and rough, period. If Eastern Union army regiments and batteries started out perhaps neater and with more military bearing and uniformity than their western counterparts, a few weeks or months in the field equalized everything! Their uniforms were permeated with sweat, campfire smoke, bacon grease, dirt, dust, black powder. Before long, everyone, east and west, had the same patina of dirt and dust and sunburn.

You look at the amount of mud that clings to everything, the stained trousers, the dust-permeated uniforms, the bronzed skin of the men.

You see pretty quickly that even though the eastern armies may have polished their buttons more perhaps, or stuck closer to uniform regulations to some degree, that after a while in the field, eastern and western appearance became very blurry indeed.

As I alluded to in another thread of western theatre vs. eastern theatre…I have seen photos of AoP soldiers in bivouac, around campfires, etc. that if I didn't know any better, I would SWEAR are images of western troops. I have to read the caption over and over to be convinced it's an image of the AoP. Sure enough, it is.

Here's the one I'm talking about!

I have become intimately familiar with this photo and others over the years, having been a reenactor and researcher with the 14th. Conn., Co G. for a number of years from 1998-2002.

This photo for me shows the blurring in appearance between east and west better than any other I have seen of Civil War troops in camp. This is the original 14th. Conn. Vols. in bivouac near Falmouth, Va., 1862-1863. This is AoP, and not late war, but mid-war!

You ask almost anyone, they would tend say this was a photo of Sherman's men in Georgia, or Rosecrans' men somewhere in Tennessee.

The VERY rough and casual slouch hats, casually worn equipment…. not quite the white glove and polish associated with the eastern theatre!

I apologize for drifting off the artillery topic, but I felt this was a relevant addition to the conversation as a whole, in looking at and evaluating real images of Civil War armies in the field and how they really looked.

Thanks again everybody, great topic!

@Bottom Dollar,

That photo you posted is one of my favorite images of the war as well! Mud on the wheels…nothing more needs to be said!

Thanks for sharing that.

Campaigner

@Trajanus,

Great link you posted! Those artillery fellows with the stained knees look like a battery serving somewhere out west with Sherman! Yes, they have shell jackets and fatigue caps for the most part, but they're dirty from head to foot…

Here's the spit and polish of the eastern theatre! Dipped in mud and dirty water.

Thanks Trajanus, great stuff.

Campaigner

Campaigner,

Yeah, they were a sight for sure! Thank God we don't have to create scale aroma too! :o)

I think you could find spit and polish in the east or the west. Just as well as you could find dirty from head to foot on both.
It all depended on how long they had been in the campaign.

link
link
civil-war.net/cw_images
link
link
link
link
link

Revisiting this thread, as I wanted to share something I read over the weekend in Pfanz – Gettysburg, The First Day.

He was describing the differences between horse [flying] and field artillery. In the former, the men were all horse mounted, with no one riding the limber box. Whilst, in the latter the men either marched alongside or were mounted upon the limber box. This seems to make eminent practical sense – with the faster moving teams and limber of the horse/flying artillery it simply wouldn't make sense to mount the limber box. Whereas, as the speed of the field artillery would typically be much slower, the men could ride the limber boxes with reasonable safety. I'm sure once they left the roads, and started to cross country, it was probably far more practical to jump down and walk, or run [short distances] to reach their deployment positions.

Pfanz, does describe the riders of one field artillery limber box being thrown and seriously hurt as the limber bounced roughly when moving from the road to cross country.

npm

Unfortunately, Mr Pfanz does not however provide any source for his description of the last incident, however on page 59 he makes the misleading statement that cannoneers in the "field batteries" rode the ammunition chests.

But on page 139 he says of the 13th NY Battery that "the cannoneers ran beside their sections, both to spare their horses and because it was too dangerous for them to ride on the limber chests'"

These broad brush statements give the impression that that riding the limbers was the norm, but when you read Instruction for field artillery, United States. War Dept, (1860) by William Henry French, William Farquhar Barry, Henry Jackson Hunt, the section on Field Service has this:
"On ordinary marches the detachments may be in front rear right or left of their respective pieces or they may all be in front or rear of the column of carriages as the circumstances may require But when the detachments are thus separated from their carriages one man should march with each.
The preservation of horses is an important duty of an artillery officer"….

These photos are great.

I think I sometimes forget how much space artillery takes with all its paraphenalia.

This is something I should consider more in my wargames.

Thanks for the photos.