Q for Military Historian dudes: dissapearance of square?

[General_Chasse]

So, as can be read in a previous message, I have been doing HWLG and TC2M. Won't talk about the differences in the game, but I do have a question: where's the infantry square in American Civil War?
When did it dissappear out of warfare and why?

[Broadsword]

So, as can be read in a previous message, I have been doing HWLG and TC2M. Won't talk about the differences in the game, but I do have a question: where's the infantry square in American Civil War?
When did it dissappear out of warfare and why?

The ACW battlefield became far more lethal for mounted cavalry, due to the Minie bullet and rifled musket. A horse made a large target and infantry soldiers could easily hit cavalry at several times the Napoleonic range. Cavalry tactics then changed so that cavalry soldiers fought primarily dismounted, keeping the horses in the rear as vehicles to speed them from place to place. So cavalry still had its reconnaissance function, and might still skirmish on horseback against other mounted cavalry (once in a while), but now the cavalry fought more like a faster and more mobile version of light infantry, armed with carbines. With the theat of cavalry charges gone, infantry no longer needed the formation designed to prtect against them: the square. Besides, forming a good square quickly was an infantry skill that took a lot of drill, and American troops in the ACW were usually raw recruits with minimal training.

[Hook]

I read that the Confederates formed square at Gettysburg, probably the only square formed during the entire ACW, when the Union cavalry bluffed a charge.

By this time the only cavalry that could be counted on to carry a charge home was elite European cavalry.

It's probably a combination of factors including cavalry training, doctrine, the cavalry's self-image, and to some extent the lethality of the weapons, although I have my doubts on that last one even though it's the accepted explanation.

Hook

[Fusilier]

Hooks quite correct, at Gettysburg part of Lanes Brigade formed squares when threatened by Buford’s cavalry.

There are a few other episodes of units forming squares with varying degrees of success. One of the more successful uses of the square was at 1st Bull Run where the 3rd US Infantry Regiments held off Cavalry and Infantry by the stone bridge. At the time the 3rd Regiment was a well drilled unit and forming squares must have been still part of its training.

I’m not sure when US Infantry discontinued the training required to form squares, perhaps one of our ACW buffs will be able to tell us.

What I do know, it was not discontinued in the British Army until much later, the famous British stand against the masses of Cavalry in the Sudan in 1885 spring readily to mind. 

[TC237]

Someone that would know: author Eric Wittenberg, he has written numerous books on Civil War Cav, can usually be found in the ACW section at the Armchair General.com forums.

Found this with a Google search for: Lane's Brigade "form square" at Gettysburg (sorry, don't have a date for this quote)
http://www.gdg.org/Research/People/Buford/dtbuford.html

...Finally, with respect to the Confederates forming square, this is an interesting debate. There is no doubt that the 52nd North Carolina of, I believe, Perrin's Brigade, formed square during the afternoon phase of July 1 in response to a feint of a mounted charge by the 8th Illinois Cavalry, under command of Major Beveridge, from a position along the Fairfield Road near the current township building. The rest is not so clear. Maj. E.P. Halstead of Doubleday's staff says unambiguously that Lane's men indeed formed square late in the afternoon in response to the threat of a mounted charge by Gamble's entire brigade. This is the only primary source I have found which says this. All OR's are silent, as are accounts by some of the cavalrymen, including Maj. Beveridge, who ought to know. I also have an article from an 1880's issue of Confed. Vet. which states unambiguously that Lane did not form square. It is therefore an open question. I tend to agree with Gary Kross that it did happen, since it is the most logical explanation of why Lane stopped his advance. However, I disagree with him as to where it happened....

....FYI, David Martin does not believe it occurred. AT his request, I reviewed a draft of an article for him on the subject, and he firmly believes that it did not. This, therefore, is one of my favority Gettysburg controversies.

My good friend Mike Phipps, licensed battlefield guide at G-burg, and a fellow Buford biographer, also believes that Lane's men formed square, largely based upon the combination of the Halstead MOLLUS paper, and on the analysis that it is the most likely explanation of why Lane stopped. Mike and I agree on where it likely took place, which is somewhere near the end of the stone wall used by Gamble's men during the afternoon phase of the July 1 fighting. That stone wall begins at the intersection of the Fairfield Road and the modern COnfederate Avenue, at the seminary, and continuing for a quarter of a mile or so.

Eric Wittenberg

[Fusilier]

Thanks for the info TC

There are enough controversies in the Napoleonic Wars without delving into the ones in the ACW, so I’ll say no more.

[TC237]

Thanks for the info TC

There are enough controversies in the Napoleonic Wars without delving into the ones in the ACW, so I’ll say no more.

...Uh-oh, I thought Napoleonics would be safe from all that...
Here is another (last) link, it is a ACW reenactors site with a discussion about ACW square
http://www.cwreenactors.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-1308.html
might be useful to follow the clues from there

[spec10]

Just to add some more napoleonic context to the ACW question: Basically in the ACW the cavalry evolved backwards from a napoleonic point of view, and was plainly spoken a force of Dragoons. Before the napoleonic era, Dragoons were simply infantrymen put on a horse, just like the cavalry in the ACW was for the most part. Of course the ACW cavalrymen were much better at riding than the early Dragoons, but in the end that wasn't that much important considering that they fought unmounted on the field.

Of course, given the circumstances, that "backwards evolvement" was the right thing to do, like others pointed out here in the thread before me

[Fusilier]

I agree that Union Cavalry often fought dismounted, a classic example is Buford’s Division at Gettysburg. Perhaps the Union doctrine leaned more towards the training in dismounted tactics as well as the usual role of scouting, covering the advance and retreat of Armies to name but a few.

Where I tend to disagree is the use of the Confederate Cavalry, especially in the early years of the war. Many southerners were practically born in the saddle and had a marked advantage over their northern counterparts. Jeb Stuart one many dashing leaders led his Cavalry in the tradition of Lassalle, much to the chagrin of Lee. Perhaps the "Light Horse" doctrine was already embedded in the psyche of the Southern troopers?

Again, this is only my personal slant on Cavalry tactics used in the war. As I said previously there must be many ACW buffs that could give us more informed view.