Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Expand Messages
  • Kevin & Judy Coy
    Tony and all, This is the site I was talking about. http://www.library.usma.edu/archives/archives.asp Good stuff, go down to the official register of the
    Message 1 of 6 , Jul 10, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Tony and all,
       
      This is the site I was talking about. http://www.library.usma.edu/archives/archives.asp
       
      Good stuff, go down to the official register of the officers and cadets.  Ckick on the plus (+).  This opens it up.  Then you are given a list of classes.  Go click on the class of your want.  If you go to the greatest class of all, the class of 1842 you will see some great info: i.e. Rosecrans was 5th in the class, 18yrs, 10 mos age at admission.  He was 3rd in engineering, 4th in ethics, 14th in infantry tactics, 4, in artillery and 5 in mineralogy and geology.  Whereas, Longstreet was 54th in class (sigh).  Ol Rosy had 19 demerits that year...HUG had 98 and Longstreet had 102.....interesting site.
       
      Kevin S. Coy
    • Tony Gunter
      ... http://www.library.usma.edu/archives/archives.asp ... cadets. Ckick on the plus (+). This opens it up. Then you are given a list of classes. Go click
      Message 2 of 6 , Jul 11, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin & Judy Coy"
        <thecoys1976@...> wrote:
        >
        > Tony and all,
        >
        > This is the site I was talking about.
        http://www.library.usma.edu/archives/archives.asp
        >
        > Good stuff, go down to the official register of the officers and
        cadets. Ckick on the plus (+). This opens it up. Then you are
        given a list of classes. Go click on the class of your want. If you
        go to the greatest class of all, the class of 1842 you will see some
        great info: i.e. Rosecrans was 5th in the class, 18yrs, 10 mos age at
        admission. He was 3rd in engineering, 4th in ethics, 14th in
        infantry tactics, 4, in artillery and 5 in mineralogy and geology.
        Whereas, Longstreet was 54th in class (sigh). Ol Rosy had 19
        demerits that year...HUG had 98 and Longstreet had
        102.....interesting site.
        >
        > Kevin S. Coy
        >

        Just curious ... what was the course material for infantry tactics?
        Was it limited to the school of the platoon, battalion, and regiment,
        or did it include course material for brigade, division, corps, and
        army level movements?
      • hank9174
        ... you ... some ... at ... tactics? ... regiment, ... Probably not. The largest tactical unit at the time was the regiment. I d suppose there was a book
        Message 3 of 6 , Jul 11, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Tony Gunter" <tony_gunter@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin & Judy Coy"
          > <thecoys1976@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Tony and all,
          > >
          > > This is the site I was talking about.
          > http://www.library.usma.edu/archives/archives.asp
          > >
          > > Good stuff, go down to the official register of the officers and
          > cadets. Ckick on the plus (+). This opens it up. Then you are
          > given a list of classes. Go click on the class of your want. If
          you
          > go to the greatest class of all, the class of 1842 you will see
          some
          > great info: i.e. Rosecrans was 5th in the class, 18yrs, 10 mos age
          at
          > admission. He was 3rd in engineering, 4th in ethics, 14th in
          > infantry tactics, 4, in artillery and 5 in mineralogy and geology.
          > Whereas, Longstreet was 54th in class (sigh). Ol Rosy had 19
          > demerits that year...HUG had 98 and Longstreet had
          > 102.....interesting site.
          > >
          > > Kevin S. Coy
          > >
          >
          > Just curious ... what was the course material for infantry
          tactics?
          > Was it limited to the school of the platoon, battalion, and
          regiment,
          > or did it include course material for brigade, division, corps, and
          > army level movements?

          Probably not. The largest tactical unit at the time was the regiment.
          I'd suppose there was a book review of Napoleon and Wellington.

          One of the most insightful lines I've heard is that the job of the
          USMA is to create 2nd lieutenants; it's up to the 2nd lieutenants to
          create generals.

          Looking at a couple of random USMA rosters, I'm struck by the
          overwhelming number of names we've never heard of...


          HankC
        • Tony Gunter
          ... McPherson s had a favorite trick that he liked, which was to engage a force with his front, and then throw his reserve against one of the flanks. Is it
          Message 4 of 6 , Jul 11, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "hank9174" <clarkc@...> wrote:
            >
            > Probably not. The largest tactical unit at the time was the regiment.
            > I'd suppose there was a book review of Napoleon and Wellington.

            McPherson's had a favorite trick that he liked, which was to engage a
            force with his front, and then throw his reserve against one of the
            flanks.

            Is it fair to say that this is basic Napoleonic strategy?
          • hank9174
            ... regiment. ... sounds like a good application of mass, offensive, economy of force, maneuver, surprise and simplicity, six of the nine principles of war...
            Message 5 of 6 , Jul 11, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Tony Gunter" <tony_gunter@...>
              wrote:
              >
              > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "hank9174" <clarkc@> wrote:
              > >
              > > Probably not. The largest tactical unit at the time was the
              regiment.
              > > I'd suppose there was a book review of Napoleon and Wellington.
              >
              > McPherson's had a favorite trick that he liked, which was to engage a
              > force with his front, and then throw his reserve against one of the
              > flanks.
              >
              > Is it fair to say that this is basic Napoleonic strategy?

              sounds like a good application of mass, offensive, economy of force,
              maneuver, surprise and simplicity, six of the nine principles of war...
            • Tom Mix
              You may be thinking of Napoleon s Maneuver of Central Position where he would attempt to divide a foe with a wedge created by his cavalry and Advance Guard. He
              Message 6 of 6 , Jul 11, 2007
              • 0 Attachment

                You may be thinking of Napoleon’s Maneuver of Central Position where he would attempt to divide a foe with a wedge created by his cavalry and Advance Guard. He would then attack the now two enemy sections determining which one to hit first with the power while the other was held in place. After the first target is defeated his focus would move to the remaining force. This was primarily used when he was out numbered.

                 

                When Napoleon had numerical superiority he attack their front holding it in place then swing around the enemy main body with an often wide march then fall upon his rear by establishing a strong defensive position on ground of his choosing forcing the enemy to fight their way out by attacking Napoleon’s new position now in their rear cutting off communications and supply. Or they could surrender.

                 

                This was made possible by his Battalion Carre’ system where each Corps moved in a lose square with no rear or front. The front would be the part that hit the enemy first. With no rear all sections were ready for combat at a moments notice.

                 

                Think of Lew Wallace at Shiloh. When he realized that he was marching in the wrong direction, his column had to move off the road to allow the front to march to the rear and re-establish the front. While with Napoleon the back of the column would now become the front as both ends were fully capable of inducing combat. In Napoleon’s Battalion Carre each of his 4 section box was fully equipped with infantry, artillery, cavalry, medical and all essentials.

                 

                Depending on McPherson’s numerical situation either could have been used. It sounds like you may be on to something here.

                 

                Tom

                 

                -----Original Message-----
                From: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com [mailto:civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tony Gunter
                Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 11:55 AM
                To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: [civilwarwest] (unknown)

                 

                --- In civilwarwest@ yahoogroups. com, "hank9174" <clarkc@...> wrote:

                >
                > Probably not. The largest tactical unit at the time was the regiment.
                > I'd suppose there was a book review of Napoleon and Wellington.

                McPherson's had a favorite trick that he liked, which was to engage a
                force with his front, and then throw his reserve against one of the
                flanks.

                Is it fair to say that this is basic Napoleonic strategy?

              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.