| The focus of this study is the design, construction, and performance of seacoast fortifications built by the Corps of Engineers during the period of the Third System. The study examines the permanent defenses planned and executed by the Board of Engineers, from the time of its formation in 1816 to its recommendation in 1864 to end the use of exposed masonry in seacoast works. It also considers how effectively the forts withstood bombardment during the Civil War.;This analysis investigates two related subjects: the development of the art of fortification during the Third System period and the performance of the permanent forts in combat. The art of fortification, responding to advances in transportation, naval construction, and artillery, improved significantly during the fifty years following the War of 1812. The Civil War was the only test of combat the coastal forts endured; however, it is an imperfect example because the South lacked the resources to arm, garrison, and reinforce its captured permanent works fully. Nevertheless, it is possible to obtain some measure of the forts' performance according to the objectives outlined by the Board of Engineers.;Simon Bernard, who first incorporated the theories of Vauban and Montalembert into single forts, designed the initial works. Bernard used caponniers, counterscarp galleries, and tower bastions as alternatives to costly flank bastions. Joseph Totten, who after Bernard became the nation's leading fortification expert, designed the latter permanent works. He answered advances in transportation and weaponry with defenses that were reduced in area, symmetrical, multilevel, and armor protected.;The Confederacy's lack of a complete coastal defense system coupled with the Union's employment of land-based rifled artillery hastened the surrender of the rebel-held forts. The Federal engineers, however, had designed the coastal defenses to fight warships, not to withstand powerful siege trains. The events of the war demonstrated that the relative strength of ships versus forts had not yet shifted in favor of naval forces. While permanent seacoast forts were vulnerable to land-based rifled artillery, they were still effective bastions against warships armed with rifled guns. |
