Another Picture

[CarlS]

Closer inspection shows that the wall is not sand. It's nearly vertical and appears to be made of mud bricks of some sort.  So perhaps a pike could be stuck into it and have strength to hold the head board.

Note at the bottom of the wall the sand that has accumulated and the grape and canister against the board holding the sand back from the cannon's platform.  They have done a good job of keeping the platform swept clean of sand.

Callicles: Thanks for sharing the image.  As my Dawgs were getting whipped tonight this gave me something fun to do to keep my mind off the game.

[Selma Brooke Gunner]

Carl that does appear to be a pike end in the ground. Good catch.

[Selma Hunter]

Again guys,

I stand corrected (by myself, it seems) that the tube in the foreground is NOT a banded tube.  I completely overlooked the lanyard draped across the breech area and in my haste thought "banded".  I would concur that the mound may not be the magazine, but as a sand (or sand, adobe and brick) fort the concreted magazine Bart refers to would have been of later vintage i.e. Span Am.  The mud or sod/adobe walls are apparent with the foliage growing in/on the wall to the left of the ladder.  The presence of the pike heads convinces me further that the "poles" we to be used for repelling scaling ladders.  Anyone who has ever played in the sand dunes can tell you how difficult it is to climb a dune of loose sand - and these walls would not have been much better than loose sand.

[Jine]

Thank you for the work you've done with those images, Carl. It's interesting to see the make-do engineering going on there as if their lives depended on it, which they did.

The image quality also amazes me. Other than the convenience of digital and the life-likeness of color imagery, I'm not sure we've come a long way in 150 years; not to include the applications in the defense industry and such.

[Dave the plumber]

                 I wonder if the fella that took that picture 150 yeares ago would have ever thunk it was gonna be the subject of such intense scrutiny !!  I guess not, otherwise he would have shown us the bottom of the shells laid out for identification, and a pike posed differently !!
        great job Carl, these photo's have been fun to 'take apart'

[CarlS]

Here is another one: The two guns look to me like a single banded Brooke gun and what appears to be a rifled and banded 32 lber; possbily a 42 lber.   On the Brooke you can see the vent cover strapped around the rear of the band and just forward of the band is what I think is a cast elevated area that has the rear sight.  I looked in Ripley's book and the big Brookes he shows did have a sight there but this one seems larger.  Lastly, note the eleveation screw appears to be wrapped in something or covered in grease.  I assume this is to keep it protected from the elements and allow for ease of movement during battle.  I did notice in the earlier pictures that the grape stands, etc. appeared rusty to me.  The carriage is nicely made and well detailed with quality that even Tom Bailey would like.

[callicles]

I've kinda got lost with terms like "headboard" and "repelling ladder attacks."  As regards the latter, how would those really prevent infantry from throwing up ladders?  I just can't visualize the concept. Also, what are the headboards (I think I see them in the picture), but what purpose did they serve?

[CarlS]

I'm not sure that it's an official military term and I'm sure some people can chime in and offer more info. I've always heard of the logs that were laid along the top of the trenches called "head logs".  You often see them in period images of the trenches.  In this case it was boards so I called them "head boards".  It's probably not an accurate name but makes sense and until I find the official name seems to work.  As to their use, I think they were there to protect the soldier's heads.  A rifleman could get up close to them for firing and perhaps even make a hole under the wood to fire through and not have the top of their heads exposed.  To get up on a thick rounded trench enough to be able to take aim and fire over it would leave a lot of your head exposed to flying lead.  Their main intent of the board/log was to stop bullets and help hide the troops behind the wall.

I don't think the reference was that the poles prevented the ladders from being thrown up but could be used to push the ladders over.  I recall the old movies where a large stone fort was being attacked and large ladders were thrown up against the wall so the attackers could scale the walls and carry the fight to the interior.  In the movies they would push the ladders backward and the ladder and the climbers would go flying back.  General Gillmore showed Ft. Pulaski and Ft. Sumter that big iron was more effective on those brick and stone forts than ladders and less of his men were lost. 

[callicles]

Okay, as regards the "head boards," I see what you're saying.  I failed to recognize how thick the boards are in the picture -- at first I thought they were much thinner.  I also agree that the "hut" is really a mound to protect the gunners. Because I'm not the smartest man in the world, it shouldn't surprise everyone that I still don't understand how those poles could be used to flip or push ladders back.  But that's just me.

Thanks for all the responses.  I learn something everytime I'm here.

[Dave the plumber]

someone put up a picture or two of a pike, and Callicles will see that they were not all straight pointey steel weapons

[alwion]

scaling ladders were conventionally pushed away or sidways with a pole. usually a short one to start and a longer one once it was away. Same technique we still use to raise tall building walls and truss's.  took some effort to go straight out, sideways not as much. Problem I have with the theory, is all of the info I've seen was the pole was forked, so you could put it against something on the ladder. Would be very hard with a pole. I'm not sure of the slope on an earthwork fortification, a ladder would be more effective on a tall straight wall. If those are pikes, pointed  on one end, and a 1 - 1 1/2 inch blunt end, I can't see getting them to stay on a ladder long enough to push it. My best guess is that an earthenwork fort has steep but possibly climbable slope and the pikes are purely an defensive weapon for stabbing, at a fellow using both hands to climb who couldn't defend himself. Better range untill he got in bayonet or sword reach. The headboard falls when the pikes are removed( eliminating something for the attacker to grab by rope or grapple and falling in the attackers face for encumberment) The failure in theis plan is like John said, why are so many outside the perimeter? You would have to expose yourself to get up and grab most of them. I thought initially they were to hold boards for the wall, and dirt piled on both sides, but the one does look like a pike, but it is inside the wall available for use. The other might or might not be the same thing.

[alwion]

I type slow:) yos thats correct, but these all appear single pointed or you buried the head making it hard to get out

[6lbgun]

Good morning,
     I feel that the boards that we see on the parapet were placed there to help reduce the accumulation of sand
in the interior of the battery.  In order to secure the boards they used what ever was handy.  In this case it was some pikes that were laying around the fort.  The close up pic of the board shows that the are tongue and groove floor boards.  These would not stop a bullet nor give much protection against hostile fire.
     I've added another picture of the battery.  This is Conrad Wise's painting of Battery Marshall.  It looks like the gun peeking out beside the lookout tower in the center is the gun that we are seeing on the left in the photograph.
Dan