Very often, on tours at
Antietam, visitors ask these three questions:
1. How
could the Civil War soldiers march into battle in close formation to face
certain death?
Part of the answer lies in the fact
that individuals living in the 1800’s had to deal with dying on a regular basis
at home. Child mortality rate was much higher than is today and, if I remember
correctly, until 1900 the average white male had a 45 year life expectancy.
They did not shy away from death. Many held wakes in their houses so everyone
could gather to pay their last respects. With the invention of photography,
family members had photographs taken of the dead, something, which we find
rather repugnant today.
Religious belief in an afterlife,
fatalism, fear of being called cowards, a strong sense of responsibility to the
company, the regiment, and the country kept men within the ranks.
They knew that no one got out of
this world alive and they knew, as soldiers do today, that they could not and
would not let their comrades down. Sad as it is, many of the veterans grimly
accepted the inevitability of their final “rendezvous.” Much like a French
Poilu in 1916 who, when he noticed a photographer focusing on his company,
turned and said, “That’s right. Take a picture of the dead.”
I also emphasize that formations
did not always remain intact while advancing and that many times the regiments
did not approach the field in straight lines but used other formations to
facilitate rapid movement and present a smaller front to the enemy.
2. Why
did they stand up to fight shoulder to shoulder, particularly since rifles had
become a standard weapon at the time?
Just like today, the
army taught its soldiers to bring the maximum amount of fire onto a target to
gain fire superiority and to force the enemy to disperse or go to ground.
Neither army, however,
at that time, devoted extensive amounts of time to target practice and they
sporadically conducted conduct “sham” battles (FTX’s – field training
exercises) to get men combat ready, but nowhere near the extent that the
military does today.
Many soldiers never
learned how to use the incremental sights on their Springfield or Enfield
rifles correctly, and muskets, having no rear sights, could miss a target at 15
yards. Therefore, officers often ordered their men to “aim” or “point” low.
The smoke from a firing
line, particularly on a breezeless day, often hung low to the ground,
drastically reducing visibility to yards and, in the case of high humidity,
feet. All too often, such as at Antietam, new regiments learned how to use
their weapons while under fire. Fighting should to shoulder allowed the
regiments to throw as much lead down range as possible.
3. Why
did they not hide behind trees and fences to fight the enemy?
As Antietam, as in
other battles, regiments very often went to ground, if the circumstances
permitted it, to return fire. They did shelter behind trees, rocks, and fences
and any available cover. Regimental lines often broke into squads and lost
their cohesiveness. Many regiments did not, given the opportunity, remain
upright and easy targets. They often took cover rather than slug it out as
their forefathers had.
What I try to convey to
the visitor is that soldiers, throughout history, have adapted their tactics to
suit the situations on the field and that the drill manuals of the time
reflected those. The main objective was to suppress incoming fire, maximize out
going fire, and use the terrain to protect maneuvering troops and to achieve
the objective with minimal casualties.
Frontal assaults across
open fields, officially known as “forlorn hopes,” allegedly, guaranteed
survivors extra rations, and promotion. With the introduction of the rifled
musket during the Mexican War, massive charges gradually became the tactic of
last resort. When used during the Civil War across cleared fields veterans on
both sides often hit the dirt and let the new regiments pass over them and “see
the elephant.”
