Civil War Infantry Tactics: Training, Combat, and Small-Unit Effectiveness

Earl Hess has written an excellent narrative history that provides a solid review of how both the Union and Confederate armies fought in the American Civil War. Having said that, this is the kind of book that the tactics or Civil War aficionado will appreciate; it is not for a casual reader of the Civil War.The author presents a very logical approach to the subject. Hess’ first two chapters review the tactical heritage inherited by those who fought the Civil War, both European and early American. The author then reviews the three primary manuals available to the two antagonists and how the officers and men trained for battle.Hess then gets into the meat of the book with six chapters reviewing specific, actual tactical situations as they were fought on the battlefield based on first person accounts by soldiers of both sides. He reviews moving forward and skirmishing, multiple lines, changing front, columns, multiple maneuvers, and large formations each with their own chapter. Although a bit dry at times the author really gets into these tactics as they were actually executed vice what the drill manuals said or where they used formations as designed. At the same time he demonstrates that, as the war went on, how the efficiency of the soldiers and their commanders steadily improved, as they were able to execute more complex tactical maneuvers even under fire.Chapter 11 then provides an overview of how tactics evolved after the Civil War. He makes the point that what really changed was not the range of rifled muskets, but the volume of fire especially as the century continued, and how tacticians changed their tactics and formations to deal with the increased lethality of the battlefield, all of which had to be balanced against the need for command and control of the troops to achieve their objectives. He also argues that the range and lethality of the battlefield really didn’t change even as the volume of fire increased, if for no other reason than human factors such as the difficulty a man has of discerning a man-size target after 300 yards.My only issue with the book, and I consider it a small one, is that Chapter 11, “Tactical Developments After the Civil War,” is not really related to the book as a whole. In other words, the first ten chapters do not support the thesis he presents in Chapter 11. And, although I found Chapter 11 very interesting, his argument requires more than a single chapter to support his conclusions.All in all a very good book, and I definitely recommend it for those who are interested in the formations and the issue of command and control on the Civil War battlefield.

When you move beyond reading about battles and leaders, you quickly discover Earl J. Hess.Chances are you will have read some of his battle histories but are now ready for his how and why books.This author is one of the few authors to look at how and why the war worked as it did.In doing so, he helps us understand some of the “silly decisions” and/or question some of the standard assumptions.These books give us an understanding of the environment the officers and men fought in and the reasons for their decisions.The American Civil War saw the transition from the smooth bore to the rifled muzzleloader.Rifling and bullet design resulted in a weapon that was lethal way beyond a smooth bore.However, battlefield conditions, the ability to communicate and human abilities worked to keep combat at about 100 yards.The author looks at how liner tactics were an efficient way to fight during the war.Additionally, the book looks at formation for regiments to corps on and off the battlefield.The training of both officers and men is well documented with a good discussion of the books available and how they differed. Last is a section looking at how the training, theory and formations worked during battle with examples drawn from reports.This could make for a sleep inducing book except for the author’s skill as a writer.The author grabs and holds are attention with excellent intelligent writing that is easy and fun to read.Well place and easy to understand illustrations support the text.This is a scholarly history with endnotes organized by page numbers at the top of the page.A full index, bibliography and glossary of terms complete the book.This handsome well-made book is a pleasure to hold and to read.

The author presents some very interesting ideas as to how and why Civil War infantry tactics did not actually change much from Napoleonic or even earlier concepts of infantry movement. I'm not sure if I completely agree with his belief that the rifle musket had little impact in how commanders moved their troops on the battlefield. While I agree that most Civil War infantry combat was at close range, I still feel that the increased lethality of the new rifled musket ball with it's comparatively higher velocity is one of the biggest reasons late war battlefields began to ressemble WWI France. I do agree that the linear formations that were used at the time were still the best way to bring fire on the opposing troops when both sides were armed with muzzle loading shoulder arms.

Hess argues that, contrary to what some other historians have asserted, the Civil War was the last Napoleonic War rather than the first modern war in terms of infantry tactics, despite the general use of the rifled musket, because it was fought largely at close range by units trained to stand shoulder-to-shoulder in lines and maneuver according to complex drill set forth in the standard training manuals available to commanders. In his view, the revolution in tactics resulting from rifled infantry weapons did not occur until several decades after the Civil War. He provides numerous detailed examples of infantry actions to demonstrate his arguments. He also provides an interesting analysis of how U.S, infantry tactics and the basic training provided to soldiers have evolved since the Civil War.

Great book at a great price

A highly thorough study of a Civil War's expected movements in battle.

This book is fundamentally about unit manoeuvres - organising, forming and moving infantry in considerable detail.It explains the problems involved in even the apparently simple process of moving straight ahead.I particularly found the passage of lines interesting as this has always been a bit of a mystery.The fundamental premise is that the rifled musket was only used at smoothbore musket range and hence the linear formation was the appropriate system for the handling of troops and not an archaic oversight.This is a well researched and good book but perhaps not the book I was expecting.I was hoping that the book would give more insight into close quarter combat with examples of the interaction of attacking and defending units - with perhaps the factors relating to successful or failed charges etc. and hence expanding on the work of Paddy Griffiths.However in this I was disappointed.

If you are really into this niche subject, then this work is a real gem, but if you are only moderately interested, then I think its not worth the struggle. Whilst the research and coverage is first rate, it is far from a page-turner. The style is technical and academic making reading a chore. I really would like to think better of it, but I had to start again several times before I was able to work my way through it, so I don't feel a better recommendation is warranted.

The book is far longer and more detailed than necessary for the general reader (or one who would like to know the main challenges of battle formations in the time of the Civil War). As well, the author seems to take for granted a great deal more military sophistication than is justified by the title of the book.

Alles super!