Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Civil War Field Artillery: Promise and Performance on the Battlefield by Earl J. Hess (review)

2024; Southern Historical Association; Volume: 90; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1353/soh.2024.a919003

2325-6893

Richard B. McCaslin,

Military History and Strategy

Reviewed by: Civil War Field Artillery: Promise and Performance on the Battlefield by Earl J. Hess Richard B. McCaslin Civil War Field Artillery: Promise and Performance on the Battlefield. By Earl J. Hess. (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2023. Pp. xxiv, 396. $50.00, ISBN 978-0-8071-7800-3.) Earl J. Hess has written more than a dozen books on the Civil War. He now adds a study of field artillery to his list of publications that are certain to remain standard references for many years. Beginning with a review of the evolution of artillery in Europe and the United States before the Civil War, [End Page 169] Hess provides his usual level of fine detail and historiographical familiarity to provide both information and analysis in a topical format. His subjects can best be divided into hardware, or the technology of guns and ordnance, and software, which includes everything from firing the pieces to organizing batteries and larger units within which they were deployed. Hess ultimately focuses on the question of whether field artillery usage in the Civil War proved effective and represented an advance in that military arm. A mixture of rifled and smoothbore guns in every battery, United States and Confederate, comprised the hardware used in the Civil War. Batteries used this blend, in varying ratios, to support infantry and cavalry. The rifled artillery was certainly more accurate for long distances, but smoothbores were more deadly at closer quarters. Of the twelve types of guns available to both sides, the twelve-pounder light gun, or "Napoleon," became the most popular. A close rival to this smoothbore for U.S. gunners was the three-inch Ordnance Rifle, with the ten-pounder Parrott Rifle used often enough to rank third in popularity. Hess complements his discussion of the guns with a fascinating analysis of the various rounds used—solid, shell, and canister—and also provides a chapter on the role of horses. The most effective way to use field artillery was in massed-fire support of infantry or cavalry, but this rarely happened, due to faults in organization (which both militaries often changed, with mixed results), command and control, and logistics. Hess provides detailed information on raising and organizing batteries, as well as training and transportation. He likewise discusses how these guns were used in defensive and offensive roles, from the perspective of their crews up the chain of command to battalion and brigade leaders. Ultimately, he concludes that, due to the nature of the Civil War armies, artillery technology outpaced the men trying to use it. The author does not cover several topics. There is nothing on artillery in the trans-Mississippi theater. While Hess cites an impressive list of sources, almost none come from the far West. Other sources and scholars have indicated that artillery service was unpopular, so battery commanders found it difficult to get crews. Hess admits that gunners were detailed from other branches, most often the infantry, but he never clearly addresses whether a distaste for serving the big guns became a significant factor. Readers also will not find much information on rockets or mortars. The latter appear only rarely, such as a brief mention in a discussion of the siege of Petersburg, Virginia. Finally, there is a lot of repetition, but perhaps that is simply for emphasis. Hess concludes that field artillery played an important role in the Civil War, but that artillerists did not reach high levels of effectiveness and therefore did not dominate battles. Constant struggles over who would control the guns reduced their impact, as did technical problems: primitive fuses, limited sizes of projectiles, and an inability to fire indirectly. While Civil War artillery represented a high point in old technology, it was supplanted in twenty years with the emergence of modern guns and ordnance. The same cannot be said about this work on the subject, which should be included in the library of any serious scholar of America's bloodiest conflict. [End Page 170] Richard B. McCaslin University of North Texas Copyright © 2024 The Southern Historical Association