An Analysis of Confederate Maneuvers and Tactics

The Tactics

The Civil War, in many aspects, represents a collage of battlefield tactics ranging from the line formations of the Revolutionary War and cavalry charges of the Napoleonic Era to the trench warfare of WWI and a new fast-paced guerilla combat that would most closely represent tactics of squad warfare in our modern times. Due to this apparent plethora of different combat styles, the Civil War saw a plethora of officers whom each vested faith and interest in entirely different approaches on the battlefield. As John Hamlin depicts in his article, “Civil War Tactics in Perspective,” “The Civil War was not particularly modern tactically, but it was not fought using the tactics of Napoleon I either. Regardless of the reasons - technology, tactics, terrain, command and control problems - or more likely a mixture of all these things - circumstances tended toward making Civil War combat less decisive than Napoleonic combat (Hamlin).” Unlike the Napoleonic Wars, most Civil War battles had little impact on whether one side won or lost and were instead only tests of each other’s fortitude, and the tactics represent this in ways. While this system of contrasting tactics sounds like it may have been helpful (and, in some cases, it was), for the most part, it resulted in unnecessary bloodshed on both sides. While many believe that the reason the Civil War was America’s costliest war lies in the bitter hatred that the opposing sides shared for one another, it is, in fact, poor tactics that can be attributed to a prodigious number of casualties. In this section, we will be explicitly analyzing Confederate Civil War tactics to better understand the war, the weaponry, and the more significant effect of these tactics after the war (Hamlin).

Penetration of Center

This maneuver involves bulking forces at the center of the line in order to pierce through the opposing forces’ lines. Once the lines have been broken, the forces will attack the enemy from the side to exploit the weak and disintegrated lines. This maneuver is often attempted if there is no way to flank the enemy. The advantage is that this attack can be a quick and decisive victory and, if performed correctly, will almost certainly annihilate or capture a large percentage of the opposing forces. This maneuver’s risks are incredibly high; if the main attack fails, the rear flanks are weakly defended and offer an easy counterattack with “the threat of being encircled by a calm commander who counters against weakened flanks and the prospect of a high casualty figure if the opposing commander makes good use of exterior lines to transfer forces to contain the attack” (“Tactics Tutorial”). A classic Civil War example is Pickett’s Charge. This was a frontal assault at the Battle of Gettysburg in which 12,500 Confederate infantry marched for ¾ of a mile across an open field under heavy rifle and artillery fire in which over half the men were killed or wounded. Pickett attempted to utilize a penetration of center technique, with Pettigrew’s company on one side and Pickett in the center, and Anderson on the other side, but massive casualties caused the attack to be a disaster because the Confederates failed to flank the Union forces which allowed Union reserves to be diverted to the frontline (“Tactics Tutorial”).

Envelopment of Single Flank

This maneuver is primarily used when one flank is blocked by terrains such as mountains, dense forests, or a river. According to the article “Tactics Tutorial,” “This maneuver involves pinning attacks on the opposing center, sometimes a flank as well, while using mobile forces to try and turn the other flank and roll up the line towards the center.” The advantages of this style of assault are that it is relatively low risk since there are well-positioned forces that remain on the frontline and that once the flanking force begins their assault, the frontline forces can close in to surround the enemy. These advantages are some of the reasons that this is one of the most utilized tactics. However, the con is that the center is left relatively weak and exposed to a counterattack when sending many forces around to the flank. During the Second Battle of Bull Run, Generals Jackson and Longstreet used this strategy to envelop General Pope’s flank and defeat his forces (“Tactics Tutorial”).

Envelopment of Both Flanks

This tactic is similar to the single flank strategy, except that both flanks are attacked instead of one. This maneuver is used when one’s forces are far superior to the opposing force in either number or tactics, so the risk of a decisive counterattack is low. The advantage of this attack is that it is almost sure to surround the enemy force if successful and often leads to a decisive victory, but “This maneuver is usually attempted – and should only be attempted – if one has a superior force or exceptional tactical skill.” The only con is that it can leave the main line weak and vulnerable to an enemy counter (“Tactics Tutorial”). Robert E. Lee utilized a similar strategy at the Battle of Chancellorsville, wherein Lee flanked General Hooker’s forces and forced a retreat across a river. The result was a Confederate victory and heavy Union casualties as the Union forces were caught off guard and forced to flee through a river that slowed their progress and led to a massacre (“Robert E. Lee’s Tactics During the Civil War”).

Feigned Withdrawal

This maneuver relies solely on communication, morale, and discipline from officers. The idea is that the enemy abandons their position to attack a “retreating” force and is then, in turn, attacked by the retreating force or the retreating forces’ reinforcements. As the article “Tactics Tutorial” describes it, “The advantage of this maneuver is the psychological impact the enemy has when being fiercely assaulted while advancing or attacking. The serious disadvantage is that a staged retreat can easily become a real one if morale and discipline are not at a high standard.” This was one of Col. John S. Mosby’s favorite tactics, allowing him to control the enemy movements and fight in his terrain. At many of his raids, he utilized this “run and gun” strategy against the inexperienced Union Cavalry regiments. At the Battle of Warrenton Junction, Mosby retreated for multiple days with the enemy in hot pursuit until he completely exhausted them and their resources. This strategy is popular for outnumbered forces to slowly wear down superior forces (“Tactics Tutorial”).

Attack in Oblique Order

This strategy is another guerilla-minded one. A smaller, secondary force distracts the enemy while the main forces amass men and supplies on the enemy’s weakest side. Then the main army makes a push against the enemy’s lines to punch through an envelope. It is similar to the frontal assault, except it utilizes the side and flanks of the enemy more than a direct attack. It is used only when there is no way to flank the enemy forces, and a direct attack is necessary. It can attack the enemy’s weakest point while defending one’s own. As the article “Tactics Tutorial” explains, “The disadvantage of this maneuver is that the imbalance of force can be disastrous if the enemy can strike said weakest point,” for if the enemy can repulse the main attack, it is almost certain to defeat as the second force is often weaker and exposed. This is more of a secondary attack strategy that is part of a much larger attack, and there are few examples of this as far as a primary attack is concerned. However, it is similar to some secondary attacks at and around the Battle of Gettysburg in which Confederate forces attacked in waves against Union forces positioned on Culp’s Hill. After numerous assaults, they failed to take the hill and retreated, suffering significant casualties (“Tactics Tutorial”).

Indirect Approach

This strategy involves attacking the enemy indirectly, often requiring a more extended flank or maneuver. As specified in “Tactics Tutorial,” “This maneuver involves distracting the enemy with secondary forces while using the main force to strategically envelop the enemy in rear and flank. This maneuver seeks to force the enemy to react and give battle on unfavourable terms for fear of being cut off from supplies or communications.” It starts with a secondary force distracting the enemy with minor assaults and skirmishes. Meanwhile, the main forces move around the enemy to cut off supplies and communications. This diverse attack strategy has few disadvantages because it is adaptable and can be morphed into a different strategy quickly. Frequently, the enemy force is forced to fight on unfavorable terms in which they have no say, and the battle can quickly become one of desperation for the enemy force. Due to the indirectness of the strategy, it is easy to disband the attack without suffering significant casualties and regroup without the threat of a devastating counterattack (“Tactics Tutorial”). Lee utilized this attack in the First Battle of Bull Run, in which Union forces attempted to attack Confederate forces North of Richmond. In response, Lee diverted his army around the Union forces and made them meet him at Bull Run, where he could fight on his terms and location. The result was a decisive victory for the Confederacy that set the tone for the war (“Robert E. Lee’s Tactics During the Civil War”).

Guerilla Warfare

Civil War tactics cannot be discussed without mention of the guerilla fighting style that the Confederacy utilized to often defeat the much better-equipped armies of the North. Mosby stood out as a leader in innovative tactics and coordination among the many guerilla fighters. Discipline and coordination are essential in fast-paced guerilla warfare, as guerilla forces are outnumbered and outgunned nine times out of ten. Mosby’s system of strict discipline cannot be ignored as it allowed for precise communication in battle and prevented possible desertion in the thick of an attack. A large portion of guerilla warfare involves holding the support of the local populace, which was another of Mosby’s defining features that he was able to utilize many a time after a battle or while on the run. The local populace often aided the Confederates regarding Union’s whereabouts and sometimes helped distract or divert Union forces with false information. As Steve Balestrieri writes in his article “Mosby’s Rangers,” “Mosby summed up his operations quite simply: ‘My purpose was to weaken the armies invading Virginia, by harassing their rear… to destroy supply trains, to break up the means of conveying intelligence, and thus isolating an army from its base, as well as its different corps from each other, to confuse their plans by capturing their dispatches, are the objects of partisan war. It is just as legitimate to fight an enemy in the rear as in the front. The only difference is in the danger…’” (Balestrieri). In this aspect, guerilla warfare during the Civil War was more of a mind game, often diverting reservists to the back to defend the communication and supply lines from the threats of constant assault. In this way, Mosby and the Confederacy’s use of guerilla warfare forever embedded it in combat, and to this day, many of his tactics are utilized (Hamlin).