The Third Army

[Blockaderunner]

Disease has often been refered to as the third army. Figures are regularly quoted as two deaths from disease to every one battlefield death. But can these figures be broken down further? For example, how many deaths can be attributed to cholera or tuberculosis? How many volunteers died from an already existing condition? I would be grateful if anyone can point me in the right direction.

[oneplez]

Try Googleing it.


Don

[gary]

I wonder if that's somewhere in the OR?

[ole]

Doubt that any real figures exist -- at least any reliable ones. Many units had "surgeons" who wouldn't know a wart from a pimple. Or cholera from diptheria. So even if a diagnosis was provided, you couldn't count on it.

Believe the number of non-combat deaths was not quite so high as two to one. But it could be. Let us know if you have any luck.

ole

[larry_cockerham]

Lots of folks died in the period of a week or even months after combat injuries who wouldn't necessarily show up on statistics. Ole is quite correct in his evaluation of Confederate medical talent. Lot of sawing and first aid going on, but with 1860s technology, it didn't matter too much where one was taken with trauma. There might be some writing published, I suspect there is, from the Sanitary Commission which included Frederick Law Olmsted and others. That's probably a place to start googling. I'm interested in the the 41st Tennessee if anyone stumbles upon medical knowledge concerning those folks.

[ole]

Was leafing through a chapter of a new book. The author said: 60,000 died from wounds, and six times that amount died of disease. My arithmetic makes that 420,000. Does that mean that 200,000 were wounded or captured and survived? (I made no attempt at verifying.) Anyway, he put an interesting perspective on it.

Many, if not most, of the earliest volunteers were country or farm boys who had never been exposed to contagious childhood diseases like mumps and measles, not to mention colds that could turn to bronchitis or pneumonia. The author mentioned that measles was the worst. That it swept through regiments in a raging tide and it wasn't unheard of for a half regiment to fall victim.

Second listed factor: Health inspectors were none to picky, if they had, in fact, any idea what they were doing. So a lot of recruits taken in were unfit for service in the first place.

About the time the unfit were sent home and the kids gained some immunity, diseases and maladies associated with a lack of sanitation began to crop up. The Regular Army had some knowledge of the proper way to set up a camp. But, as we've seen, there were precious few Regulars or Regular Officers. Bad food, bad water, bad hygiene, and vermin took over where the childhood diseases left off.

Thought you'd be interested.

ole

[cw1865]

Well, it would probably be interesting to note if Stonewall Jackson, according to the period of the day, would be considered to be a combat casualty or if he died from disease (pneumonia).....I'd call that death a combat fatality....

In my head I always 'think' of the US Civil War as leading to 600,000 dead, and disease killing approx. 3X KIA.....when I want to be precise, I just look it up...

110,000 killed in action,
360,000 total dead,
275,200 wounded93,000 killed in action,
258,000 total dead,
137,000+ wounded

Total mortality of the event (everybody, slave and free, North & South), exceeds 2% of the population.

I remains the single most traumatic event in US history (in both absolute and per capita terms)....(and let's hope it remains that way)

[samgrant]

Originally Posted by ole

Was leafing through a chapter of a new book. The author said: 60,000 died from wounds, and six times that amount died of disease. My arithmetic makes that 420,000. Does that mean that 200,000 were wounded or captured and survived? (I made no attempt at verifying.) Anyway, he put an interesting perspective on it.

Many, if not most, of the earliest volunteers were country or farm boys who had never been exposed to contagious childhood diseases like mumps and measles, not to mention colds that could turn to bronchitis or pneumonia. The author mentioned that measles was the worst. That it swept through regiments in a raging tide and it wasn't unheard of for a half regiment to fall victim.

Second listed factor: Health inspectors were none to picky, if they had, in fact, any idea what they were doing. So a lot of recruits taken in were unfit for service in the first place.

About the time the unfit were sent home and the kids gained some immunity, diseases and maladies associated with a lack of sanitation began to crop up. The Regular Army had some knowledge of the proper way to set up a camp. But, as we've seen, there were precious few Regulars or Regular Officers. Bad food, bad water, bad hygiene, and vermin took over where the childhood diseases left off.

Thought you'd be interested.

ole

Might that "new book" be The Republic of Suffering?

-

[blue_zouave]

To answer the original question, the best reference I've found on this subject is "Civil War Medicine, Challenges and Triumphs" by Alfred Jay Bollet, MD There are other books out there called "Civil War Medicine" but this one is the most extensive on the subject of disease. There's one for sale on Abebooks right now for about $40.00.

When people view Civil War medicine, they often do so with their 21st century specs on, not unlike what Dr. Faust was accused of doing on another thread.

The political surgeons who didn't know cholera from diphtheria were weeded out early, when grim reality set in and they realized that the war would last much longer than 90 days.

Ever ready to leap to the defense of the Medical Corps,
Zou

[blue_zouave]

Originally Posted by gary

I wonder if that's somewhere in the OR?

It's probably located in the "Medical and Surgical History of the War of the Rebellion," which this humble Zouave covets but can't afford a copy of!