Engineering Victory: How Technology Won the Civil War

Joshism

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2019
Messages
488
Reaction score
587
Engineering Victory: How Technology Won the Civil War by Thomas F. Army Jr. (John Hopkins University Press - hardcover 2016, softcover 2018)

This book takes an interesting approach to the American Civil War by arguing that Northern engineering is what allowed the Union to triumph over the Confederacy. Specifically the ability to rapidly and effectively build, repair, and maintain transportation infrastructure allowing for the movement of men and supplies.

About 50 pages are spent contrasting the antebellum North and South with an emphasis on three key ideas: the North had a better public school system and placed greater emphasis on education than their Southern counterparts; the North was a better meritocracy than the south, allowing the creative and talented to advance both themselves and their society's technology, and also had an economy that placed greater emphasis on trade skills; the North's well-known advantage in railroads meant they also had far more people with engineering, mechanical, and trade skills than their Southern counterparts. The less obvious advantages of railroads on society really intrigued me as these were new ideas to me. The economic/meritocracy advantages were fairly unsurprising. The difference in educational systems felt a little dense and is probably something that could be an entire topic in its own right.

The rest of the book is essentially an engineering history of the war through case studies. Many of the obvious topics are covered like the creativity in dealing with Island Number Ten, the extensive engineering during the Vicksburg campaign, the dams that saved Porter's flotilla on the Red River, the Army of the Potomac bridging the James River, the mine at Petersburg that led to the Battle of the Crater, and Sherman's bridge-building during his 1864-1865 campaigns. There is an entire chapter on the formation and training of volunteer engineer regiments in the Union Army, and another about the development of the US Military Railroad under Herman Haupt.

This book emphasizes Union accomplishments. The coverage of Confederates emphasizes instances of bungling. The poor placement of Fort Henry and the mismanagement of Southern railroads are prime examples. Even Confederate successes are shown as demonstrating Confederate weaknesses. For example, consider the improvised pontoon bridge at Williamsport at the tail end of the Gettysburg Campaign? The whole thing was mismanaged and slow; their Union counterparts could have done the same thing faster and better.

Disappointingly, this is very much a series of case studies and not a complete history. Because of the thesis, the important of West Point engineers at times feels a bit peripheral. Other than Vicksburg and Forts Henry and Donelson, fortifications and siegecraft are largely skipped over. Fieldworks during the Overland Campaign and the creation of the Confederate earthworks around Vicksburg, Petersburg, and Atlanta are pretty much skipped except a short mention of how the Atlanta fortifications were placed too close to the city. Even the impressive defensive works erected by the Union at Knoxville in late 1863 go unmentioned. The Confederates poorly placed defensive works atop Missionary Ridge (on the true crest instead of the military crest), one of the most infamous Confederate engineering blunders of the war (perhaps second only to the placement of Fort Henry), go unmentioned. To some degree this may be an effort to avoid covering ground that may have already been well-turned (pun intended) in some of the books by Earl Hess. Mostly though it seems the result of dedication to thesis. I find that Thomas Army's writing about engineering is pretty good so the selective coverage feels unfortunate. Considering this book started as a doctoral dissertation and is both from a university press that does not usually publish Civil War works, I can't say the decision make a tightly focused book is surprising.

This is a pretty interesting book that I strongly recommend to anyone interested in the Civil War. It provides an interesting perspective on the war. The more I learn about military history the more I understand logistics are critical. Just be aware of what the book is and isn't. For other readers, I think it is worthwhile for those interested in engineering and technology, even if you're only an amateur. My growing interest in the subject of engineering is one of the reasons I read this book. I wouldn't recommend it to a general audience.
 

Jim Klag

Ike the moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,690
Reaction score
2,296
Engineering Victory: How Technology Won the Civil War by Thomas F. Army Jr. (John Hopkins University Press - hardcover 2016, softcover 2018)

This book takes an interesting approach to the American Civil War by arguing that Northern engineering is what allowed the Union to triumph over the Confederacy. Specifically the ability to rapidly and effectively build, repair, and maintain transportation infrastructure allowing for the movement of men and supplies.

About 50 pages are spent contrasting the antebellum North and South with an emphasis on three key ideas: the North had a better public school system and placed greater emphasis on education than their Southern counterparts; the North was a better meritocracy than the south, allowing the creative and talented to advance both themselves and their society's technology, and also had an economy that placed greater emphasis on trade skills; the North's well-known advantage in railroads meant they also had far more people with engineering, mechanical, and trade skills than their Southern counterparts. The less obvious advantages of railroads on society really intrigued me as these were new ideas to me. The economic/meritocracy advantages were fairly unsurprising. The difference in educational systems felt a little dense and is probably something that could be an entire topic in its own right.

The rest of the book is essentially an engineering history of the war through case studies. Many of the obvious topics are covered like the creativity in dealing with Island Number Ten, the extensive engineering during the Vicksburg campaign, the dams that saved Porter's flotilla on the Red River, the Army of the Potomac bridging the James River, the mine at Petersburg that led to the Battle of the Crater, and Sherman's bridge-building during his 1864-1865 campaigns. There is an entire chapter on the formation and training of volunteer engineer regiments in the Union Army, and another about the development of the US Military Railroad under Herman Haupt.

This book emphasizes Union accomplishments. The coverage of Confederates emphasizes instances of bungling. The poor placement of Fort Henry and the mismanagement of Southern railroads are prime examples. Even Confederate successes are shown as demonstrating Confederate weaknesses. For example, consider the improvised pontoon bridge at Williamsport at the tail end of the Gettysburg Campaign? The whole thing was mismanaged and slow; their Union counterparts could have done the same thing faster and better.

Disappointingly, this is very much a series of case studies and not a complete history. Because of the thesis, the important of West Point engineers at times feels a bit peripheral. Other than Vicksburg and Forts Henry and Donelson, fortifications and siegecraft are largely skipped over. Fieldworks during the Overland Campaign and the creation of the Confederate earthworks around Vicksburg, Petersburg, and Atlanta are pretty much skipped except a short mention of how the Atlanta fortifications were placed too close to the city. Even the impressive defensive works erected by the Union at Knoxville in late 1863 go unmentioned. The Confederates poorly placed defensive works atop Missionary Ridge (on the true crest instead of the military crest), one of the most infamous Confederate engineering blunders of the war (perhaps second only to the placement of Fort Henry), go unmentioned. To some degree this may be an effort to avoid covering ground that may have already been well-turned (pun intended) in some of the books by Earl Hess. Mostly though it seems the result of dedication to thesis. I find that Thomas Army's writing about engineering is pretty good so the selective coverage feels unfortunate. Considering this book started as a doctoral dissertation and is both from a university press that does not usually publish Civil War works, I can't say the decision make a tightly focused book is surprising.

This is a pretty interesting book that I strongly recommend to anyone interested in the Civil War. It provides an interesting perspective on the war. The more I learn about military history the more I understand logistics are critical. Just be aware of what the book is and isn't. For other readers, I think it is worthwhile for those interested in engineering and technology, even if you're only an amateur. My growing interest in the subject of engineering is one of the reasons I read this book. I wouldn't recommend it to a general audience.
As an old retired engineer, I'm going to add this one to my library. I have long been interested in Civil War engineering. Nice review, @Joshism .
 

byron ed

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2020
Messages
873
Reaction score
296
In the same vein, a book which I consider a primary reference for study of the ACW even if written as British history, is this book about the decade leading up to the Civil War which provides startling world-wide context to the ACW -- particularly in regards technology, sheer engineering of the day.

For instance the role of gutta-percha, which was the only substance (as a coating for wire bundles) that could enable undersea telegraph, which in turn drove both investment and exploration and the expansion of empire (stock-trading became a singular profession for the first time, investments made in a few days rather than months because of world-crossing telegraph -- this is a good place to mention the state of cotton-trading in that decade, which directly affected the fate of the U.S. South leading up to and during the CW). Not to mention how telegraph affected war-making generally. Other notable technologies that directly affected events in that decade include Yankee Clipper ships and (curiously enough) the 1853 Enfield rifle, which in turn led to more efficient (if brutal) colonization of more primitive lands, the profits of which in turn drove accelerated exploration and the discovery of gold fields in British (Australia) and U.S. (California, Colorado) territories, which of course led to more investment capital for industrialization, not the least of which involved more steam power in factories, trains and boats including warships, as well as displacements or immigration of peoples the world over. This is a good place to mention that the ACW was -- if nothing else -- war on an industrial scale, forced immigrants (slavery) the cause of that war and volunteer immigrants (the soldier ranks) the grist of that war.

Anyway enough of my synopsis. Here's the book and an excerpt from a professional book reviewer:

“Heyday: the 1850s and the dawn of the global age” 2016 Ben Wilson (ISBN9780465064250)

“...a globe-spanning narrative history of the 1850s--a time of electrifying change--seen through the eyes of the men and women who embraced the adventurous spirit of the times. Heyday brings to life one of the most extraordinary periods in modern history. From 1851, in the space of little more than a decade, the world was reshaped by technology, trade, mass migration and war. As instantaneous electric communication bridged the vast gulfs that separated human societies, millions of settlers travelled to the far corners of the Earth, building vast cities out of nothing in lightning-quick time. A new generation of fast steamships and railways connected these burgeoning frontier societies, shrinking the world and creating an interlinked global economy...”
 

Jim Klag

Ike the moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,690
Reaction score
2,296
In the same vein, a book which I consider a primary reference for study of the ACW even if written as British history, is this book about the decade leading up to the Civil War which provides startling world-wide context to the ACW -- particularly in regards technology, sheer engineering of the day.

For instance the role of gutta-percha, which was the only substance (as a coating for wire bundles) that could enable undersea telegraph, which in turn drove both investment and exploration and the expansion of empire (stock-trading became a singular profession for the first time, investments made in a few days rather than months because of world-crossing telegraph -- this is a good place to mention the state of cotton-trading in that decade, which directly affected the fate of the U.S. South leading up to and during the CW). Not to mention how telegraph affected war-making generally. Other notable technologies that directly affected events in that decade include Yankee Clipper ships and (curiously enough) the 1853 Enfield rifle, which in turn led to more efficient (if brutal) colonization of more primitive lands, the profits of which in turn drove accelerated exploration and the discovery of gold fields in British (Australia) and U.S. (California, Colorado) territories, which of course led to more investment capital for industrialization, not the least of which involved more steam power in factories, trains and boats including warships, as well as displacements or immigration of peoples the world over. This is a good place to mention that the ACW was -- if nothing else -- war on an industrial scale, forced immigrants (slavery) the cause of that war and volunteer immigrants (the soldier ranks) the grist of that war.

Anyway enough of my synopsis. Here's the book and an excerpt from a professional book reviewer:

“Heyday: the 1850s and the dawn of the global age” 2016 Ben Wilson (ISBN9780465064250)

“...a globe-spanning narrative history of the 1850s--a time of electrifying change--seen through the eyes of the men and women who embraced the adventurous spirit of the times. Heyday brings to life one of the most extraordinary periods in modern history. From 1851, in the space of little more than a decade, the world was reshaped by technology, trade, mass migration and war. As instantaneous electric communication bridged the vast gulfs that separated human societies, millions of settlers travelled to the far corners of the Earth, building vast cities out of nothing in lightning-quick time. A new generation of fast steamships and railways connected these burgeoning frontier societies, shrinking the world and creating an interlinked global economy...”
I've read this book. It's kind of along the lines of Connections - taking different factors from different places and connecting them and examining the result. Wilson gets a little tiresome and repetitive, and goes through some gyrations to get things to fit his premise, but overall it's a pretty good book. Another really good book on engineering throughout history is Simon Winchester's The Perfectionists: How Precision Engineers Created The Modern World. Winchester's book tracks the men and inventions that gradually increased our ability to create more precise machine tools and measuring devices and thereby make the end product machines more efficient.
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,619
Reaction score
4,544
I found this paper on Civil War Engineering Victory... its a long read...


My dissertation explores the critical advantage the Union held over the Confederacy in military engineering. The skills Union soldiers displayed during the war at bridge building, railroad repair, and road making demonstrated mechanical ability and often revealed ingenuity and imagination. These skills were developed during the antebellum period when northerners invested in educational systems that served an industrializing economy. In the decades before the war, northern states’ attempt at implementing basic educational reforms, the spread of informal educational practices directed at mechanics and artisans, and the exponential growth in manufacturing all generated a different work related ethos than that of the South. The northern labor system rewarded mechanical ability, invention, and creativity. The labor system in the South failed to do this. Plantation slavery generated fabulous wealth for a tiny percent of the southern white population. It fostered a particular style of agriculture and scientific farming that limited land use. It curtailed manufacturing opportunities, and it stifled educational opportunities for the middle and lower classes because those in political power feared that an educated yeomanry would be filled with radical ideas such as women’s equality, temperance, and, worst of all, abolition.

snip...

These differences in the North and South produced unique skill sets in both armies, and consequently, resulted in more successful and resourceful Union engineering operations during the war. Moreover, without the unique and astonishing engineering operations conducted by common laborers, machinists, shipbuilders, and both common school educated and West Point trained engineers, it was unlikely the North would have won the war. The outcome of the Civil War depended on the Union Army’s ability to improvise and take the war to the South. Northern armies operated on unfamiliar terrain, which included mountain ranges, swamps and wetlands, alluvial plains, forests, and rugged hills, all of which were difficult to access because of dismal road systems and poorly mapped landscapes. Union generals were forced to execute a strategy that demanded the control of 750,000 square miles of territory and the defeat of enemy armies, partisan raiders and cavalry constantly threatening long and tenuous supply lines. Between 1861 and 1865 the North engineered victory.
 

Joshism

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2019
Messages
488
Reaction score
587
I'm reading a biography of Orlando Poe. He was Chief Engineer of the XXIII, during which he established Camp Nelson to supply the Knoxville Campaign. Then as Burnside's Chief Engineer he was responsible for creating the Knoxville defenses. Poe had a 300-man engineer battalion under his command, with qualified men on detached duty from volunteer regiments. Poe's biographer says that "Poe's design and planning of the Union defensive works was a masterpiece of military engineering."

But the entire campaign goes unmentioned in Engineering Victory.
 

byron ed

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2020
Messages
873
Reaction score
296
...men and inventions that gradually increased our ability to create more precise machine tools and measuring devices and thereby make the end product machines more efficient.
To note the setting, many of these technology pioneers were not academically qualified; had not earned college degrees. The contributions of West Point alumnus excepted, it was primarily home-grown bench-top engineering that brought us to the brink of; and set the foundation for; what today we call advanced technology.

My career in Communications embedded with high-technology engineering firms had led me to research the basis of the technology in these firms. Turns out that most of the core technologies had originated well before WW2, back to the turn of the 20th century and in some cases before that, as developed by non-degreed engineers. For instance certain advances in machine tooling from then are directly connected to every commercial jet airliner and spacecraft flying today (turbine blade structure and rpm governance*).

These core technologies were the inventions of the children and grandchildren of the Civil War generation. It's that Yankee ingenuity thing (to include Southerners in that). That's not to ignore that things like electronic digital communication and the screw propeller (captivation analysis) had origins even before the Civil War.





- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
* what traditional machine tool company in the U.S. is that? A challenge for the somebody here who likely knows. Hint: five-axis.
 
Last edited:

byron ed

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2020
Messages
873
Reaction score
296
I'm reading a biography of Orlando Poe....responsible for creating the Knoxville defenses...But the entire campaign goes unmentioned in Engineering Victory.
Po' Orlando
 

Joshism

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2019
Messages
488
Reaction score
587
Po' Orlando
He was just a Poe boy
From a Poe family
Being an engineer
Spared him his life from that monstrosity (combat)
No easy come nor easy go
(Poe) Will you let me go...receive a brigadier's star?
(Congress) No, we will not let you go!
 
Top