| American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC) http://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/ |
|
| City fights?? http://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12023 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Pat Thompson [ Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | City fights?? |
I was just wondering about any actual fighting in cities/town in the Civil War. I don't really remember reading about much. I know in Gettysburg itself there was some fighting, but mostly chasing disordered Union troops out... or cornering them in dead ends causing them to surrender. Cities always seemed to be abandoned because the armies outside of them got defeated. Anyone know of any? Col Thompson 1/3/VI AoS |
|
| Author: | mihalik [ Mon Mar 10, 2008 8:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
There was fighting in city streets, but I don't believe any major battles were fought in cities, unlike battles such as Stalingrad in WWII. I suspect this was primarily because civilians were generally considered off-limits during most of the war, but it might also have included tactical considerations. I imagine city terrain would limit a battery's field of fire, and it would be difficult if not impossible to maneuver in line of battle in a city. Fighting did occur in Gettysburg (the brickyard), Memphis during Forrest's raid in 1864, and Baton Rouge in 1862, I believe, and Fredricksburg, where Barksdale's Brigade took shelter in the town and fought to delay the Yankees from establishing a bridgehead. Galveston saw some fighting on New Year's Day of 1863 as well. That's all I can think of off the top of my head. MG Mike Mihalik 1/III/AoMiss/CSA |
|
| Author: | Art Ingram [ Mon Mar 10, 2008 8:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Col. Thompson, There were several small skimishes in Missouri that were involved in small cities, but the largest that I am aware of was just Sumner's Grand Division of Burnside's AoP facing Barksdale's brigade in Fredericksburg. Barksdale's boys held the crossing of the Rappahannock for most of the morning on Dec.11. They held the corps of engineers from work on the pontoons until the Federals unleashed a fury of cannon fire onto the city. It was not customary to engage wars in cities in those days, it just wasn't approved of by either side. Here a little known fact, Just take a look at Burnside and you'll understand where the term sideburns comes from. The only person in the whole war to attempt to destroy cities was Hooker when he burnt Atlanta and Butler when he announced his martial law in New Orleans. Butler didn't try to New Orleans, but he did a good job of making enemies of the population, looting houses and shipping a great many items to his home.[V] Art "Razorback" Ingram 3rd Brig/3rd Div/I Crps AotM/CSA |
|
| Author: | D.S. Walter [ Mon Mar 10, 2008 10:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Fighting in cities needs special skills, training for which was not in the books in the mid-nineteenth century. For a badly trained army of citizen soldiers whose standard fighting formation is a firing line of battalions arrayed shoulder-to-shoulder, a city fight is a nightmare plain and simple. Gen. Walter, USA <i>The Blue Blitz</i> 3/2/VIII AoS 
West Point Class of '01 |
|
| Author: | laubster22 [ Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Williamsburg and Fredricksburg come to mind as examples...not common, I agree... 
General Jeff Laub Union Chief of the Army ACWGC Cabinet Member http://www.geocities.com/laubster22/UnionHQ/ |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|