"What Were the Major Strategies of the Civil War?." Topic

"To get a better understanding of how the Civil War played out as it did, it is helpful to evaluate the strategies of both the North and the South in the Civil War.

The battles and events that took place were not random encounters or skirmishes but were instead, well-planned and thought-out strategies to secure supplies, keep lines of military communication open, prevent wide scale casualties and to gain and control more ground.

Both sides had their own ideas on how to accomplish this and the strategies they used have been widely scrutinized, studied, evaluated and recreated ever since…."
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

The generals started the war all thinking they were going to be Napoleons but the armies were simply too large to win that way and they wound up in a grinding war of attrition.

ok

Amicalement
Armand

The Civil War generals had mostly been schooled in the Napoleonic traditions. Most of them, Lee perhaps most of all, was looking for an Austerlitz, a victory so devastating that it would end the war right there. They failed to understand that the nature of war had changed to the point that that sort of thing really didn't happen much anymore (it hadn't happened all that often earlier, either).

It is understandable since any general would love to win such a victory, and certainly the public and politicians on both sides were demanding a quick war-winning campaign.

The generals who ultimately prevailed were the ones who recognized the realities and planned their actions around what was possible rather than wishful thinking.

In opposition to the Austerlitz strategy above, the Union had the Anaconda plan of Winfield Scott. Basically just strangle the south over time. Not as glamorous or fast, but it worked. The big stumbling block was the Union navy had to expand quite a bit to pull it off. In addition, it couldn't be as bloodless as Scott first thought as the south needed the pressure of a war of attrition before it would break. link

The third big strategic idea was the southern Napoleonic idea of the Russian Campaign. I.e, the south is so big and sparse that they could just lure the Yankees in and widdle them away just like the Russians did Napoleon. Of course, this idea didn't take into account Russian and southern winters are a bit different. However, this thought did propel men like General Forrest into the popular imagination.

The other thing confounding this 'Russian Strategy' (not that I've ever heard of this in regards the ACW before) was the presence of railroads and navigable rivers in Southern territory. The Union armies could be kept supplied almost anywhere they went.

Good point!

Amicalement
Armand

Before the "Russian strategy" (which I have never heard of either) was the Southern strategy insisted upon by Davis that every point should be defended. This led to Confederate troops, especially in the west, being strung out in penny packets with disastrous results.

If you want a really good study of strategy in the American Civil War my I recommend:

With a Sword in One Hand and Jomini in the Other: The Problem of Military Thought in the Civil War North
Book by Carol Reardon

link

The basic conclusion is that the influence of European military thought, especially Jomini was missing in the American Civil War. Clauswitz was not translated before the Civil War.

The more telling thing about the Civil War was than neither side produced a strategic thinker of the quality of von Moltke the Elder.

Here is an interview with Carol Reardon

link

The newspapers pressured the North into an initial strategy of striking to take Richmond, with the theory being that the Confederacy would promptly collapse once its capital was taken.

The Anaconda strategy was widely rejected when proposed.

"The Civil War generals had mostly been schooled in the Napoleonic traditions. Most of them, Lee perhaps most of all, was looking for an Austerlitz, a victory so devastating that it would end the war right there. They failed to understand that the nature of war had changed to the point that that sort of thing really didn't happen much anymore (it hadn't happened all that often earlier, either)."

But the prussian did this in both 1866 and 1870???? The weapons here was better and the armies larger….

"The art of war is simple enough. Find out where your enemy is. Get at him as soon as you can. Strike him as hard as you can, and keep moving on."
― Ulysses S. Grant

Kim