Engineering in the Confederate Heartland by Larry J. Daniel

IF 0.3 4区 历史学 Q2 HISTORY
Thomas F. Army
{"title":"Engineering in the Confederate Heartland by Larry J. Daniel","authors":"Thomas F. Army","doi":"10.1162/jinh_r_01942","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"tailed its potential impact. The Civil War looked more like Napoleonic warfare than land combat in World War I. According to Hess, it was “mostly an old-fashioned war,” at least “as far as its artillery was concerned” (313). Hess extensively explores strategic effectiveness, the book’s other forest, but without reaching a conclusion. He addresses the matter repeatedly, at times equating effectiveness with efficiency, but he never actually defines the term. His exhaustive research yields only three instances in which medical personnel recorded wounds from artillery and infantry in the same engagement; artillery accounted for 8.8 percent, 26.7 percent, and 12.2 percent, respectively in those instances. The historical record addressed effectiveness often, though always subjectively. The most illuminating anecdote came from a Union captain who always wanted artillery support, regardless of whether it inflicted any casualties. A social-science or statistical methodology might have been able to wring more insights from the imperfect data.","PeriodicalId":46755,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interdisciplinary History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interdisciplinary History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/jinh_r_01942","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

tailed its potential impact. The Civil War looked more like Napoleonic warfare than land combat in World War I. According to Hess, it was “mostly an old-fashioned war,” at least “as far as its artillery was concerned” (313). Hess extensively explores strategic effectiveness, the book’s other forest, but without reaching a conclusion. He addresses the matter repeatedly, at times equating effectiveness with efficiency, but he never actually defines the term. His exhaustive research yields only three instances in which medical personnel recorded wounds from artillery and infantry in the same engagement; artillery accounted for 8.8 percent, 26.7 percent, and 12.2 percent, respectively in those instances. The historical record addressed effectiveness often, though always subjectively. The most illuminating anecdote came from a Union captain who always wanted artillery support, regardless of whether it inflicted any casualties. A social-science or statistical methodology might have been able to wring more insights from the imperfect data.
拉里·J·丹尼尔的《南方腹地的工程》
减少了潜在的影响。内战看起来更像拿破仑战争,而不是第一次世界大战中的陆战。根据赫斯的说法,它“基本上是一场老式战争”,至少“就炮兵而言”(313)。赫斯对本书的另一片森林——战略有效性进行了广泛的探讨,但没有得出结论。他反复强调这个问题,有时将有效性等同于效率,但他从未真正定义这个术语。他详尽的研究表明,医务人员在同一次交战中只记录了三起炮兵和步兵造成的伤口;火炮的比例分别为8.8%、26.7%和12.2%。历史记录经常提到有效性,尽管总是主观的。最具启发性的轶事来自一位联邦上尉,他总是需要炮兵支援,不管是否造成人员伤亡。社会科学或统计方法也许能够从不完善的数据中得出更多的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
20.00%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: The Journal of Interdisciplinary History features substantive articles, research notes, review essays, and book reviews relating historical research and work in applied fields-such as economics and demographics. Spanning all geographical areas and periods of history, topics include: - social history - demographic history - psychohistory - political history - family history - economic history - cultural history - technological history
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信