Chapter 14

American Civil War Wargaming

The American Civil War (1861–1865) has always been understandably popular with wargamers in the United States, but has also aroused much interest elsewhere owing to its inherent fascination for the military historian. This is because it can be seen as the first modern war: the significance of mass mobilization of the citizenry, and the primacy of firepower on the battlefield, anticipated the world wars of the twentieth century.

The American Civil War was fought over the issue of the rights of individual states, and stemmed from the very different nature of the northern and southern parts of the United States. Much of the north was industrialized, and relied upon a fluid economy with the free movement of labour; the south was by contrast agrarian, with a static economy and a stratified society – including the institution of slavery. This led to great tension with the north, which was exacerbated as the United States expanded westwards, with the south being terrified that new states would reject slavery, eventually leading to the southern states being outvoted in Congress. The perception that their way of life was undermined led to the southern states attempting to secede from the Union, and war with the north that was determined not to let that happen. The conflict ended with the complete defeat of the Southern Confederacy; and the forcible re-integration of all states within the Union.

The military problems created at the start of the conflict were formidable. Americans had always believed that large armies posed an intrinsic threat to traditional liberties. The regular army was accordingly small; a citizen militia was supposed to rise up and defend the nation in the event of an existential crisis. This view may have had splendid ideological purity and liberal moral rectitude, but resulted in significant problems during the American Civil War, when large numbers of untrained men had to be enlisted very quickly. The existing officer corps found itself in great demand from both sides, but this too created problems: men who had previously commanded a hundred men were told to lead ten thousand. This had some rather unanticipated results, as some previously brilliant officers were found wanting (such as the Union General McClellan); other men with a distinctly mediocre record proved to be inspired commanders at the highest level (the Union General Grant being the most notable example).

The masses of untrained men behaved rather unpredictably on the battlefield, as they inevitably proved incapable of following the complex manoeuvres prescribed in existing drillbooks. The result was that units adopted a rather loose formation, with their undisciplined nature leading to an inability to engage the enemy in hand-to-hand combat. Both infantry and cavalry units would instead indulge in lengthy firefights with the enemy.

The trend towards shooting rather than mêlée was encouraged by new weaponry, as muzzle loading rifles had taken over from the old smoothbore muskets. Rifled barrels allowed much greater accuracy as well as a longer effective range; the invention of a new type of bullet now meant that rifles could be reloaded as quickly as the old weapons with smooth barrels. There has been a great deal of debate over whether new weaponry or undisciplined troops was responsible for the primacy of the firefight; the trend was however incontestable, and my wargame rules reflect it: musketry and artillery is decisive, and hand-tohand combat banned.

My rules provide for four different troop types, the characteristics of which are outlined below:

1. INFANTRY

The effects of loose order formations are the prime considerations that must be accounted for with foot soldiers in the American Civil War. I therefore allow Infantry units to enter woods, but ban them from engaging in hand-to-hand combat.

2. ZOUAVES

All Infantry units may have been created equally, but some proved to be decidedly more equal than others. ‘Zouaves’ is a convenient generic term covering all élite infantry: Zouave units were themselves modelled upon European regiments of that designation, and adopted the rather flamboyant dress that was characteristic of the breed. It has to be said that not all Zouave units performed especially well (although many did); they did however see themselves as being an élite, and their presence does allow wargamers to distinguish them by virtue of their distinctive apparel. Less romantic if more historically accurate wargamers may simply dress all foot soldiers in similar rather drab uniforms, and classify individual units as ‘Zouaves’ (or ‘Elite Infantry’ if he or she prefers).

Zouave units may not enter hand-to-hand combat, but do move more rapidly than Infantry. Their musketry is also more effective, as befitting their more capable battlefield performance.

3. ARTILLERY

The overall effect of Artillery was roughly the same, irrespective of whether or not it was equipped with smoothbore or rifled ordnance (the former was still more popular and prevalent on the battlefield). Artillery units had a similar effect to their Horse and Musket predecessors, and are treated accordingly in these rules.

4. CAVALRY

Cavalry units showed a distinct inability to charge during the American Civil War, resulting in their effectively being treated as extremely mobile Infantry (although incapable of moving in woods or occupying towns, owing to the inability of horses to operate in such obstructive terrain). Cavalry musketry is however less effective than that of Infantry, reflecting the fact that mounted units were smaller than those on foot, and that some men had to hold the horses of those who dismounted to fire. Cavalry troopers invariably got off their horses to shoot: firing from horseback was never a practical proposition, given that an animal could scarcely be described as a stable firing platform.

The best way of depicting the American Civil War is by effectively using my Horse and Musket wargames rules, but by banning hand-to-hand combat, and allowing Cavalry to shoot. Other special considerations are covered below.

The effects of loose formation have already been mentioned, in that Infantry and Zouave units may move through woods. It could also be argued that loose formation would allow interpenetration, so that units may pass through each other – especially as contemporary drillbooks provided for it, and it was attempted on the battlefield. It did however result in extreme disorder in practice, which is why I do not allow interpenetration in these rules.

The effects of firing have already been discussed. The rules allow Zouaves to shoot more effectively than Infantry, with Artillery and Cavalry conversely being less potent – albeit that ordnance enjoys the benefit of a much longer range. The range for all types of musketry is designed to be that at which firing took effect, rather than the absolute maximum.