DK - The American Civil War

Fighting on Foot

Infantry tactics in the Civil War were based on existing technology, local terrain, and the European

tradition of warfare in which American officers were steeped. Heavy casualties resulted from the failure

to adapt battlefield tactics to take account of the increased defensive firepower of infantry and artillery.

CLASH OF ARMIES 1862

I

nfantry began the Civil War equipped

with an assortment of weapons,

including inaccurate, old-fashioned

smoothbore flintlock muskets. By the

second year of the war, however, the

standard weapon on both sides had

become the rifle musket—either an

Enfield or a Springfield. The rapid

loading and firing of this weapon in the

heat of conflict was a foot soldier’s

essential skill. Before he could fire, he

had to take out a paper cartridge

containing the minié ball and powder

charge; rip open the cartridge with his

teeth; ram powder and ball down the

barrel with his ramrod; and take a

percussion cap from its box and place

it in the firing mechanism. Yet this

apparently clumsy, muzzle-loaded

weapon marked a vital evolution in

warfare. An experienced man might

fire his Springfield three times a minute,

its rifled, or grooved, barrel offering

improved accuracy and an effective

range of 300–400yd (274–366m)—

three times that of a smoothbore

flintlock. Under pressure, men would

make mistakes, leaving the ramrod in

the barrel or even forgetting to load the

powder and ball. But a rifle musket,

correctly used, was a reliable arm. In

defense, its range and rate of fire

Rifle cartridges

A cartridge consisted of a minié ball and its powder charge

wrapped in paper. The soldier bit open the cartridge before

loading, a process that left his face blackened by powder.

In some new models of rifle, paper cartridges were

superseded by metal cartridges during the Civil War.

Civil War commanders adopted infantry

tactics based on a European tradition that

had proved effective since the introduction

of the flintlock musket around 1700.

FIGHTING DRILL

European infantry were taught to fight as rigidly

drilled automatons. When on the defensive,

they stood in the open, firing disciplined volleys

with their muskets. For the offense, they

advanced steadily across open ground in

tight formation of column or line with bayonets

fixed. For defense against charging cavalry,

the infantry formed squares.

These basic infantry tactics, which had been

used in the Napoleonic Wars, were studied as

models at American military colleges and were

employed by American infantry in the War with

Mexico in 1846–48.

Later European conflicts, such as the Crimean

War of 1854–56, showed that improved

weaponry made traditional frontal infantry

assaults very costly, especially when defenders

were entrenched in field fortifications. These

lessons were largely ignored in the United States

and had to be learned over again in the Civil War.

THE WAR WITH MEXICO

BEFORE

presented a serious problem for an

attacking force that had to cover open

ground in a frontal assault.

The line breaks down

Both Northern and Southern generals

had no doubt that battles could only be

won by large bodies of drilled and

disciplined troops automatically

obeying orders. Popular manuals, such

as W. J. Hardee’s Rifle and Light Infantry

Tactics, stated that infantry should attack

by advancing steadily in close packed

lines, kept in strict formation by their

officers, with men acting as “file

closers” at the rear to stop the cowardly