American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

ACWGC Forums

* ACWGC    * Dpt. of Records (DoR)    *Club Recruiting Office     ACWGC Memorial

* CSA HQ    * VMI   * Join CSA    

* Union HQ   * UMA   * Join Union    

CSA Armies:   ANV   AoT

Union Armies:   AotP    AotT

Link Express

Club Forums:     NWC    CCC     Home Pages:     NWC    CCC    ACWGC
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 10:22 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Lee's Error at Antietam?
PostPosted: Tue Oct 27, 2020 7:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 1:55 am
Posts: 936
Location: Tennessee
Considering that portions of Lee's Army were along the Antietam Creek from September 15 until the start of the battle two days later it is surprising that defensive works were never constructed. Especially since his back was to a river and he was badly outnumbered. Was this more a result of the attitude towards trenches in 1862 or a consequence of the overconfidence felt by the Army of Northern Virginia?

I've never really thought about this much before. How different could it have been if Lee's men were entrenched behind 1864-style works on September 17?

_________________
Gen. Blake Strickler
Confederate General-in-Chief
El Presidente 2010 - 2012

Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:36 pm
Posts: 592
I had never thought of that, General. It's quite the contrast as you pointed out a few years later into the War, I've read several places that every time a unit stopped, they would start throwing up any kind of defensive work they could.
Maybe Lee wanted his troops more in an offensive state if mind over the defensive thinking defensive works would give? Just a thought.

_________________
Colonel Jason "Skeedaddle" Campbell
The Mahoning 4th Brigade
3rd Division
2nd Corp

AoT
"Let's fill up our canteens, boys. Some of us will be in hell before nightfall and we'll need the water"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 8:03 pm
Posts: 2410
Location: USA
https://emergingcivilwar.com/2019/01/28 ... de-bridge/

There is another link inside this one that goes deeper.

_________________
Gen Ned Simms
2/XVI Corps/AotT
Blood 'n Guts hisself, a land lovin' pirate. Show me some arty tubes and we'll charge 'em.
VMI Class of '00


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 28, 2020 7:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 1324
I think field fortification was a tactic that evolved over time. You don't read much about it in the battles of 1861 and 1862. In 1863 you have fortifications at Fredricksburg, but they were prepared after the 1862 battle while the ANV spent the winter there.

At Gettysburg you have the trenches on Culp's Hill but nowhere else. At Chickamauga Thomas' men cut down trees for protection, but I have never read of any protection for Rosecrans' right wing.

It wasn't until 1864 that field fortification became ubiquitous.

It appears that throughout troops used natural and manmade features such as trees and stone walls for protection, however.

There is a reason there are scenarios in Campaign Peninsula where the entrenching feature is disabled.

_________________
MG Mike Mihalik
Forrest's Cavalry Corps
AoWest/CSA


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2020 5:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 2469
Location:
I think too elements of Antietam's landscape/farm fields allowed for some protection. I also think Lee was banking on the advantage of George McClellan bringing himself to the battle as well. 8) :mrgreen:

That's a neat article Ned, thanks for sharing it! I'll have to watch his presentation later. I spend a lot of time at Antietam and down in the area of Burnside's Bridge, though not always at it. NPS has been redoing the landscape a bit in the area for almost two years now. Made an access ramp down to the bridge from the parking area at the top, which is roughly where Benning had his lines. The parking area I believe is slowly being moved to the backside of the hill and the walls & displays at the top of it are closed off and being removed. Though I haven't confirmed it 100%, I assume it is part land restoration, which if the case, I'm curious to see if research like this has any part of it. It also is an accessibility thing too. The ramp is a slow grade sidewalk that does down the side of the hill. I've got photos I can dig out and if I go to Antietam in the near future, I'll snap some more. It's been really neat to see the work unfold.

_________________
General Scott Ludwig
4/II/ANV


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 101 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group