The Rifle-Musket did not really influence the Civil War

The sheer difficulty of SEEING a man sized target at 600 yards, let alone aiming and hitting them, cannot be understated. Under ideal conditions at the range, with iron sites, that 300 meter target is really hard to hit. I always accepted I was going to miss at least three exposures (the 300 meter target) and saved those rounds as back up for closer ones on the pop up range. There's also a distinct lack of flatness to the world. I think many people underestimate just how rolling and undulating the field at Gettysburg that Pickett's Charge traversed. The attackers disappeared from the view of Union soldiers several times as they made their way across. It's really easy for a lot of folks to imagine a battlefield of this time period was a bunch of football fields with a few bushes or a fence or two scattered about. And then there's the massive rolling clouds of smoke.

One other reason why it matters to get the impact of the rifled musket straight is that the traditional narrative implies that superior equipment is all you need in war, whereas, as you show, there needs to be a lot of training to be able to use that equipment. I was struck by that "eight times faster" claim in the History Channel, and wondered if you would mention it. It suggest they're confusing the rifled musket with something like the Dreyse needle gun. So much for the History Channel.

The first volley is the only volley in which a soldier using a black powder rifle has a clear view of his target. Even today most soldiers can't reliably hit targets beyond 300 yards under the pressure of combat. It makes sense then to withhold the first volley until the distance is short enough for the majority of soldiers to aim reliably.

Props for saying you qualified as marksman. No one on YouTube qualifies below expert and when they get out no one shoots over 0.75 MOA groups even with their sidearm.

I shot a lot before I went to basic, my granddad WW2, Dad Korean and boy scout leader Vietnam, made sure all of us boys and gals within their circle new how to shoot with iron sights and we all started with single shot guns. A lot of us went into the military. Growing up like that, I just assumed that everyone knew how to shoot, I was amazed that hardly anyone had ever even shot a gun before, and like you said, at distance. I grew up in the mountains in Oregon, where we hunted to fill the freezer and shot handgun silhouette. We used M16A1's when I went in, I was already used to shooting peep sights and buckhorns out to 300 yards. I am really grateful to everyone who shoot me how to shoot when I was young and since then. It made me a better soldier and later a better hunter also. I still learned different things in the military about better ways to shoot and how not only different positions changed, but tactics also. Awesome presentation as always, you seem pass out nuggets of good stuff every time. I am also fascinated with history and the weapons.

I went into this video rolling my eyes at the title and thinking "yeah sure bro. I will hear you out" but damn do you make a good argument for the idea. Can't beleive i never thought of this stuff

And because of this.......Poor Union soldier marksmanship.....the NRA was founded in 1871.

"They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance."

I LOVED your improvised step out into the street to SHOW us the scene of that actual rifle vs rifle, sharpshooter vs sharpshooter face off.

The rifle musket is really not more effective than a smoothbore in the hands of a common private, but the minie ball is a much deadlier projectile. A round ball flies so poorly through the air it loses much more of its kinetic energy at range.

Yes you are correct about learning how to shoot when you enlisted into the Army. I had experience as a kid and US Army JROTC being on the school rifle team. During Basic Training at Ft. Benning we had old M16A1 rifles from the Vietnam era in 1986. I shot horribly on our first diagnostic qualification along with everyone being over confident. I qualified by one shot. Only 12 guys along with me only qualified as marksman.I told my Drill Sergeant that I wasn't good enough that I needed retraining. My Drill Sergeant admired my honesty that they gave me more push ups and made me do 7 pull ups everyday during rifle qualification week. They made me very tired and told me to relax, I was too high strung. They told me final qualification was another week and at the end of the 2 weeks. I was on the Weaponeer everyday and on the zero range and pop up 300 meter range. I took advantage of the retraining. Finally on qualification day just for myself just barely making Marksman, I qualified expert during Basic and again at Infantry AIT before graduation. My Drill Sergeants smoked me to relax and to work through the pain and focus on sight picture and trigger squeeze. My Drill Sergeants were amazing instructors indeed.

One of the best private docs I've seen. Kudos sir. Looking forward to seeing more.

I’m so glad to finally see this video! I’ve been wanting to hear more on this topic since we meet back in Nov. Its really good to hear the real history of it all. Be interested to hear more about the sharpshooters and any know engagements they took part in.

The National Rifle Association NRA was founded by military men, about 8 years after the Civil War, for the purpose you are explaining. Thank you.

It should be recalled that the introduction of the percussion cap increased the reliability of the weapon to repeatedly fire. In Napoleonic warfare, a battalion's flintlock fire could decrease to possibly only 60 percent of the muskets available after the first volley.

Dry compelling to the end, a well put together presentation that has many dovetailing details to it. You presented it very well. I learnt sumpin new!

Found you through the collab, I like what I see, subbed. I don't think there exists a single History Channel documentary that doesn't have at least one glaring mistake. It's always been a huge problem with made for tv (or streaming service nowadays) documentaries. A company orders a doc from some agency, and the people producing it don't gaf about accuracy, it's just a paycheck for them. The rise of the amateur YouTube historian has been a blessing.

I came after a recommendation from Brandon F and the “Because History Matters” collaboration. I was very enlightened to learn about the truth behind civil war tactics and why the devastating war casualties took place, not as a result of the effectiveness of the Rifle, but more as the result of the poor training of the soldiers in modern firearms training that would have given them the tactical advantage in combat. You’ve got a long term viewer out of me!

Well done mate! Really good to see such a good historical analysis on youtube (or anywhere else these days). So good to see a study collect and analyse evidence, then draw conclusions, rather than the other way around.

Very interesting topic. The potential for the rifle-musket was there, in theory, but in the real world it could never be realized except in some unusual situations, like specialist sharpshooter units.