Antietam Scholarship

[Michael C. Hardy]

We have some great books on the Maryland Campaign – Tom Clemens got the Carman Manuscript in print; Scott Hartwig's To Antietam Creek and I Dread the Thought of the Place; Harsh's three volumes on Confederate strategy; Gottfried's maps; Johnson's Artillery Hell; Priest's two volumes; Ernst's Too Afraid to Cry: Maryland Civilians in the Antietam Campaign; Cowie's When Hell Came to Sharpsburg; Frassanito's book of images; and for those who just want one volume, Sears's Landscape Turn Red (there are others).

Here, on the 162nd Anniversary battle of Sharpsburg/Antietam, what still needs to be covered? I would argue that there needs to be a good book on the battle and the hospitals, something more detailed than Schildt's Antietam Hospitals. What are your thoughts?

 

[Scott1967]

I would say the effect of the Elliot Grave maps has turned the battle on its head where as before the release many historians thought Antietam was a close Union victory or a stalemate with the release of the maps we now know Lee's army took a hell of a beating and McClellan was not exaggerating his claim of 4000 Confederate dead when writing his report months after , This alone makes Antietam a major Union victory the complete opposite of what was once thought.

I would also like to add that in my view it was Lee's finest moment how he rode around with two fractured wrists dictating every movement to the finest detail is beyond me the fact his army survived intact goes to show his skill as a commander in the field under any other General i feel the AoNV would have folded.

IMHO.

 

[Michael C. Hardy]

I would say the effect of the Elliot Grave maps has turned the battle on its head where as before the release many historians thought Antietam was a close Union victory or a stalemate with the release of the maps we now know Lee's army took a hell of a beating and McClellan was not exaggerating his claim of 4000 Confederate dead when writing his report months after , This alone makes Antietam a major Union victory the complete opposite of what was once thought.

IMHO.

If we look at the campaign as a whole, would you still feel the same? Confederates losses were 10,863 while Federal losses were 25,398 (using American Battlefield Trust numbers). These are killed, wounded, and captured.

 

[4thMichigan]

I would suggest adding the book "Shephardstown: Last Clash of the Antietam Campaign September 19-20, 1862" to the library. The author is Thomas A. McGrath, and the book was published back in 2007 by Schroeder Publications. While not exhaustive, it does cover a topic which many overlook in their study of "Antietam".

 

[4thMichigan]

I must point out that the book really didn't include much about the actions of the Fourth Michigan Infantry during the onset of that engagement. If I were capable of going back in time, I would have provided the author with some material to address that shortcoming.

 

[G Low]

We have some great books on the Maryland Campaign – Tom Clemens got the Carman Manuscript in print; Scott Hartwig's To Antietam Creek and I Dread the Thought of the Place; Harsh's three volumes on Confederate strategy; Gottfried's maps; Johnson's Artillery Hell; Priest's two volumes; Ernst's Too Afraid to Cry: Maryland Civilians in the Antietam Campaign; Cowie's When Hell Came to Sharpsburg; Frassanito's book of images; and for those who just want one volume, Sears's Landscape Turn Red (there are others).

Here, on the 162nd Anniversary battle of Sharpsburg/Antietam, what still needs to be covered? I would argue that there needs to be a good book on the battle and the hospitals, something more detailed than Schildt's Antietam Hospitals. What are your thoughts?

View attachment 521670

My goodness Looks like you got it covered….

 

[AA484]

A couple others of note:

Murfin's Gleam of Bayonets
Marion V. Armstrong's two books on the Union II Corps actions (from both the Union and Confederate perspective)
Reardon and Vossler's Antietam tour book

 

[Jamieva]

I would suggest adding the book "Shephardstown: Last Clash of the Antietam Campaign September 19-20, 1862" to the library. The author is Thomas A. McGrath, and the book was published back in 2007 by Schroeder Publications. While not exhaustive, it does cover a topic which many overlook in their study of "Antietam".

View attachment 521681

View attachment 521682

Hartwig covered it well in his work.

 

[RedRover]

If we look at the campaign as a whole, would you still feel the same? Confederates losses were 10,863 while Federal losses were 25,398 (using American Battlefield Trust numbers). These are killed, wounded, and captured.

Perhaps the Confederate unit records relative to Maryland campaign casualties might be forensically examined in the future, something like the Busey's have done with Gettysburg.

Col. Walter Taylor, Lee's former Assistant adjutant General, recalled after the war the total casualties for the Maryland campaign, so far as Lee's headquarters was apprized, was in excess of 12,000:

Later, E. Porter Alexander, using the subsequently published war records, calculated from the reported casualties throughout the campaign, "so far as they appear," the following number of Lee's killed, wounded, missing, and the total reported, at over 13,000:

The federals reported burial of at least 3,000 CSA corpses on the field at Sharpsburg (besides about 500 other graves made by the CS troops on the 17th and 18th, and captured about 3,500 more.

Where Confederate sources for Gettysburg give something like 2,592 killed, etc., the federals who held the battlefield reported at least 7,000 CSA burials on or about the field among the killed and mortally wounded. The Busey's recent research into Confederate regimental and other records have turned up to the present record of at least 6,602 CSA dead there.

Perhaps something similar could be done with records relative to the Maryland campaign.



Regarding US casualties, the federals tabulated just over 12,000 casualties in battle on Sept. 16-17.

A large proportion of the federal losses in the campaign were the garrison of Harper's Ferry which surrendered to Jackson, numbering over 12,000 more. E. Porter Alexander tabulated the reports in the Official Records somewhat as follows:

 

[Chattahooch33]

I just can't imagine anything adding on to Hartwig's two books except maybe some niche topics of the battle or first hand accounts.

 

[AA484]

I just can't imagine anything adding on to Hartwig's two books except maybe some niche topics of the battle or first hand accounts.

This is pretty accurate -- Hartwig goes into as much detail on South Mountain in his first volume as the last book covering that battle did.

 

[LCYingling3rd]

@Michael C. Hardy

You have a lovely collection of books on the Antietam/Sharpsburg battle! I have a lot of catching up to do! LOL

There is quite a bit about the battle and the campaign that I am interested in, and I can't say if some of your books already cover the topics or not, so I really can't say if we need new books about them. I am interested in whether or not McClellan could have done more to break Lee's center at the Sunken Road? That is probably covered in books I haven't read; however, I would love to see a detailed analysis about it. I have heard that he could have used some of Porter's Corps to reinforce the breakthrough there and I believe Franklin tried to have McClellan send him to do it? Could reinforcements at the center have split the Confederate army and turned a victory into a rout. So, I would like to see some in-depth analysis of that theory, however, it may already exist and maybe you could point me to it.

I have also heard of some battlefield archeology that was done at Antietam and I would like to learn more about that. I recall learning that the archeologists had discovered large quantities of buck and ball which helped them better understand the placement of the Irish Brigade? I would be interested in discovering if other archeology was done and whether it affected the interpretations we have of the battle?

There are so many interesting questions that I haven't seen answered in the few books I have. Could better use of Union Cavalry have alerted the High Command of Hill's approaching reinforcements and could anything have been done about it? How did the loss of high-level Union commanders affect the battle? Corps commanders Hooker and Mansfield were casualties as were Brigadiers Richardson and Rodman. Is there any study of whether the outcome would have been different without their losses? There are so many facets of this historic engagement that interest me.

And, I have William Frassanito's Antietam book, but I would always like to see more books on the photography done at Antietam. That is just an interest of mine.

Thanks for your post on this historic anniversary!

 

[Belfoured]

We have some great books on the Maryland Campaign – Tom Clemens got the Carman Manuscript in print; Scott Hartwig's To Antietam Creek and I Dread the Thought of the Place; Harsh's three volumes on Confederate strategy; Gottfried's maps; Johnson's Artillery Hell; Priest's two volumes; Ernst's Too Afraid to Cry: Maryland Civilians in the Antietam Campaign; Cowie's When Hell Came to Sharpsburg; Frassanito's book of images; and for those who just want one volume, Sears's Landscape Turn Red (there are others).

Here, on the 162nd Anniversary battle of Sharpsburg/Antietam, what still needs to be covered? I would argue that there needs to be a good book on the battle and the hospitals, something more detailed than Schildt's Antietam Hospitals. What are your thoughts?

View attachment 521670

To a guy who wrote a great study of Hanover Court House, I would argue that we really need more on the Peninsula Campaign.

 

[Michael C. Hardy]

@Michael C. Hardy

You have a lovely collection of books on the Antietam/Sharpsburg battle! I have a lot of catching up to do! LOL

There is quite a bit about the battle and the campaign that I am interested in, and I can't say if some of your books already cover the topics or not, so I really can't say if we need new books about them. I am interested in whether or not McClellan could have done more to break Lee's center at the Sunken Road? That is probably covered in books I haven't read; however, I would love to see a detailed analysis about it. I have heard that he could have used some of Porter's Corps to reinforce the breakthrough there and I believe Franklin tried to have McClellan send him to do it? Could reinforcements at the center have split the Confederate army and turned a victory into a rout. So, I would like to see some in-depth analysis of that theory, however, it may already exist and maybe you could point me to it.

I have also heard of some battlefield archeology that was done at Antietam and I would like to learn more about that. I recall learning that the archeologists had discovered large quantities of buck and ball which helped them better understand the placement of the Irish Brigade? I would be interested in discovering if other archeology was done and whether it affected the interpretations we have of the battle?

There are so many interesting questions that I haven't seen answered in the few books I have. Could better use of Union Cavalry have alerted the High Command of Hill's approaching reinforcements and could anything have been done about it? How did the loss of high-level Union commanders affect the battle? Corps commanders Hooker and Mansfield were casualties as were Brigadiers Richardson and Rodman. Is there any study of whether the outcome would have been different without their losses? There are so many facets of this historic engagement that interest me.

And, I have William Frassanito's Antietam book, but I would always like to see more books on the photography done at Antietam. That is just an interest of mine.

Thanks for your post on this historic anniversary!

To a guy who wrote a great study of Hanover Court House, I would argue that we really need more on the Peninsula Campaign.

I would love to write a series on Seven Days like the Overland Campaign books...

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

Here, on the 162nd Anniversary battle of Sharpsburg/Antietam, what still needs to be covered?

Sears' book is 40 years old. There have been good multivolume studies since then and supplemental, tangential, and otherwise narrow standalone works, but a first-rate single-volume successor to Landscape Turned Read is much needed.

 

[Library Lady]

I'm not convinced this is what you're looking for, but it was new in the library this morning. It was released on September 3, 2024. Unfortunately, the catalogue entry doesn't give the table of contents for this book nor are there additional reviews.

A Day in September: The Battle of Antietam and the World It Left Behind by Stephen Budiansky

A DAY IN SEPTEMBER | Kirkus Reviews

The September 1862 battle recounted through the lives of nine participants.

www.kirkusreviews.com

A Day in September

One of the Wall Street Journal's 10 Best Books of The Year“A very different and very welcome direction in Civil War battle history.… Extraordinary.” —Allen C. Guelzo, National ReviewA panoramic account of the fateful Civil War battle and its far-reaching consequences for American society and...

wwnorton.com

 

[Joe Whitworth]

My mental clutch is slipping, I was in Sharpsburg today and today's date went right by me. Same with the Sept 12-13 battle in my backyard, Maryland Heights, the dates just slid by while carrying on with life As I drive into Sharpsburg tomorrow to meet a friend I'll think of the sad aftermath of the 18th

 

[Scott1967]

If we look at the campaign as a whole, would you still feel the same? Confederates losses were 10,863 while Federal losses were 25,398 (using American Battlefield Trust numbers). These are killed, wounded, and captured.

All I know is Lee crossed back over the Potomac with around 28,000 men some stragglers may have joined later but not that many.

Lee started the campaign with around 55,000 men maybe as high as 60,000 were not sure and that's the thing were never sure about Confederate numbers or casualties but its safe to say Lee lost many more men than once thought.

 

[Michael C. Hardy]

I'm not convinced this is what you're looking for, but it was new in the library this morning. It was released on September 3, 2024. Unfortunately, the catalogue entry doesn't give the table of contents for this book nor are there additional reviews.

A Day in September: The Battle of Antietam and the World It Left Behind by Stephen Budiansky

A DAY IN SEPTEMBER | Kirkus Reviews

The September 1862 battle recounted through the lives of nine participants.

www.kirkusreviews.com

A Day in September

One of the Wall Street Journal's 10 Best Books of The Year“A very different and very welcome direction in Civil War battle history.… Extraordinary.” —Allen C. Guelzo, National ReviewA panoramic account of the fateful Civil War battle and its far-reaching consequences for American society and...

wwnorton.com

Interesting. Thanks!

 

[4thMichigan]

Hartwig covered it well in his work.

How much information did he provide concerning the Fourth Michigan Infantry's role in the battle?