Author |
Message |
Slaughter
| Posted on Sunday, January 13, 2013 - 04:32 pm: |
|
Some EXCELLENT reading on battlefield tactics in view of the evolution of weaponry during the Civil War. The use of rifles coupled with insistence on Napoleonic tactics (massed lines of soldiers advancing into AIMED fire) - changed the way wars were fought from that point on. From the abstract:
quote:This thesis examines the effect the rifle had on infantry tactics during the Civil War. It traces the transition from smoothbore to rifle and the development of the Minie ball. The range and accuracy of various weapons are discussed and several tables illustrate the increased capabilities of the rifle. Tactics to exploit the new weapon are examined, primarily those of William Hlardee. Using flardee's tactics as the standard rifle tactics before the war, the change in how infantry soldiers fought is documented with two battle analyses. The 1862 Maryland Campaign shows the start of tactical evolution as soldiers seek cover, expend large quantities of ammunition and are decisively engaged at greater distances. During the 1864 Wilderness-Spotsyllvania battle, the conIcepts Of fortification defense and skirmish offense take hold. Examining several current books that deal with the rifle and its effects, the thesis concludes that the rifle's increased firepower was a major factor in the move away from Hardee's formation tactics.
There's much to be learned about our modern-day assumptions. Full Text (DTIC publication) http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a227467.pd f For those of us who must occasionally read DTIC works - this is actually INTERESTING! |
Mtnmason
| Posted on Sunday, January 13, 2013 - 04:50 pm: |
|
Thanks for the post! The War for Southern Independence produced unimaginable carnage due to the technology having far surpassed the tactics. I'd like to think that I have more extensive knowledge about this conflict than most folks my age (30) and it still boggles my mind that the military leaders on both sides did not acknowledge this reality from the outset of the war. Shelby Foote said that the Union fought the Civil War with one hand tied behind its back - or something to that effect. It was in some ways an asymmetrical war, not so much for the sake of technological asymmetry (i.e. Iraq/Afghanistan) but due to the fact that the North enjoyed such a large discrepancy in regards to manpower and resources. That said - had the South employed guerrilla tactics from the beginning, the entire picture of the conflict would have been vastly different from what we study today. |
Loki
| Posted on Sunday, January 13, 2013 - 05:49 pm: |
|
Slaughter, actually a very good read. |
Britchri10
| Posted on Sunday, January 13, 2013 - 06:26 pm: |
|
Military leaders were still acting that way in WWI. Don't be surprised. Lions led by sheep! Chris C |
Aesquire
| Posted on Monday, January 14, 2013 - 10:32 pm: |
|
Thanks, interesting essay. The American Civil War, AKA The War Of Northern Aggression, was the first machine age war. Lessons learned were often ignored overseas. For a Very interesting Fictional take, read Harry Harrison's "Stars And Stripes" trilogy. An alternate world where things change mid Civil War. One of the 2 important cusps is the death of the US Army Chief of Ordnance, Brigadier General James W. Ripley. Ripley had rejected Gatling guns and other repeaters to try and simplify supply. With his deputy in charge, the US went for the Spencer Repeater, etc..... A fun and quick read. Well researched and written. |
Cityxslicker
| Posted on Tuesday, January 15, 2013 - 02:16 am: |
|
I smell sequel |
|