Military Power

What was the purpose of line formations back around the revolutionary war / civil war times? I mean, sure, you have lots of inaccurate projectiles flying to a group of people, at least one would hit, but you also put yourself in the position of being easily hit yourself.

Did the commanders not think about the effects their tactics had on the enemy's effectiveness? You give your enemy a much larger mass to fire their less than accurate weapons into, increasing the chances of your own men getting hit. Plus you provide a much larger target for cannons and the shrapnel that goes along with them. Or did the commanders think that the benefits outweighed the losses?

Benefits outweighed the losses. The commanders figured that both forces had the same weapons, and they were usually firing through brush and undergrowth in the forested areas. In the engagements like Gettysburg, the forces used flanking manuevers to get the upper hand. Line fighting was less effective in situations like that.

There are a few reasons why line formations were determined to be beneficial. The first was that when in transit, opposing forces tended to attack from the side. The line formation allowed troops to fire on the attackers ina more effective manner (See crude text drawing). The defender can have more troops fire on the concentrated attacking forces.

I=Defenders H=Attackers

I I I I I I

HHH



The second reason (including bad drawing) is that when troops fired from a stationary position, they could fire in volleys.

Observe troop lines 1 and 2. Line 1 stands in front of line 2 and fires. Line 1 then kneels to reload while line 2 fires their guns. Line 2 kneels and line 1 stands and fires, and so on, and so on, and so on.

2- XXXXXXXXXXX

1- XXXXXXXXXXX


Enemy Forces

---------------------------------
Not only did volley firing increase the chance of hitting a target, it also allowed troops to keep almost continuous fire on opposing troops since skilled fighters could reload in the amount of time it takes to fire.

Still, during the American Revolution, most of the battles that the colonists won, and especially the first major victories, were all done with guerrilla warfare. Did they forget that when the Civil War came around?

Well, the Yankees HAD far weaker lines than the British ones. Redcoats were good infantry, and the colonists were not professional soldiers. The tactic with least casualties for the colonists and most casualties for the British was guerilla warfare.
The victories against the redcoats are mostly due to the French helping the rebels by cutting off British supplies.

But that still doesn't really explain why they didn't continue to not use line formations in the Civil War

KnightTemplar wrote:But that still doesn't really explain why they didn't continue to not use line formations in the Civil War

American formations during the Civil War were based on Drill Manuals which were almost direct translations from French originals: Scott's Infantry Tactics 1835, updated in Hardee's Rifle and Light Infantry Tactics, 1855, and Casey's Evolution of a Brigade and Corps d'Armee, 1862.

So, basically, we didn't learn from the mistakes of history?

The commanders back then - no.