General Lee's "Lost Order" # 191

[Bruce Vail]

I wonder why D.H. Hill never published his memoirs? It seems like every other surviving Confederate general did...

 

[Andy Cardinal]

One of the interesting things about the Antietam campaign is the command situation in both armies. Both seem to have been unsettled and caused issues during the campaign. In the Army of the Potomac, McClellan divided the army into three wings -- sort of a trial run for Burnside's grand divisions. He inexplicably and without explanation broke this structure up prior to the battle. Burnside responded with a stubborn fit. Sumner was also confused I think as he was supposed to be in charge of the 12th corps too.

 

[Andy Cardinal]

According to Jackson's report, no. Only Jackson's division (J.R. Jones), Ewell's division (Lawton), and A.P. Hill's Light Division were part of his command.

View attachment 140994


The common but incorrect assumption about the order of battle for the Army of Northern Virginia comes from confusion resulting from the organization of the First and Second Corps, which happened in the campaign after Antietam. After the war, many people just assumed that the divisions fought under Longstreet and Jackson because Longstreet and Jackson were the two corps commanders appointed after the battle. While Longstreet and Jackson were the primary wing commanders, Joseph Harsh argues that D.H. Hill and McLaws temporarily operated as "wing" commanders (though with less permanence than the forces attached to Longstreet and Jackson) because Lee was testing potential commanders for a third maneuver element, with Hill in particular in place of G.W. Smith, while D. Scott Hartwig argues that the divisions outside of Longstreet and Jackson were just independent of the wings and assigned as needed.

Per Hartwig, the Army of Northern Virginia was organized at Antietam like:
Longstreet's Command
D.R. Jones's Division
Hood's Division
Evans's Independent Brigade
Anderson's Division
Washington Artillery
S.D. Lee's Artillery

Jackson's Command
Jackson's Division
Ewell's Division
Light Division

Independent Commands:
D.H. Hill's Division
McLaws's Division
Walker's Division
Reserve Artillery
Stuart's Cavalry Division


For most of the campaign, D.H. Hill's division, McLaws's division, Walker's division, the Reserve Artillery, and the Cavalry Division all reported directly to Lee. This is why D.H. Hill is receiving an order directly from Lee's headquarters. In the normal military protocol, if he were part of Jackson's command then the order would have gone through Jackson. Jackson, who thought D.H. Hill's division was still under his command, followed that procedure, unaware that Lee was sending a direct order.

Thanks for providing the details.

 

[67th Tigers]

One of the interesting things about the Antietam campaign is the command situation in both armies. Both seem to have been unsettled and caused issues during the campaign. In the Army of the Potomac, McClellan divided the army into three wings -- sort of a trial run for Burnside's grand divisions. He inexplicably and without explanation broke this structure up prior to the battle. Burnside responded with a stubborn fit. Sumner was also confused I think as he was supposed to be in charge of the 12th corps too.

Whilst on the march the army was in three wings. Burnside's wing was broken up because 9th Corps had been really slow getting to Antietam and Hooker with 1st Corps had been pretty fast. See this map of the roads in the area:

From Middletown Hooker's 1st Corps went on the right hand fork, through Turner's Gap to Boonsboro, and hence naturally ended up on the northern end of the field.

Burnside delayed, and Sykes pushed past him, but they went on the left fork, naturally to the southern end.

Essentially the force that went on the northern fork was led by Richardson's division and the force on the southern fork was led by Sykes. They met at the Porter bridge ("middle bridge") and formed up either side of that. The following formations on each road filled out right from Richardson (1st Corps, then 2nd and 12th in reserve behind them) and left from Sykes (9th Corps).

6th Corps came via the road from Burkettsville and Rohrerville.

 

[Andy Cardinal]

So, Hill's Division was made officially part of Jackson's command, sometime after Antietam?

That didn't last very long though, because Hill was transferred out of the ANV sometime after Fredericksburg but before Chancellorsville.

Hill was transferred but his division remained with the Army of Northern Virginia. Lee apparently did not have a high opinion of Hill's abilities in command of a division, although he was a good combat commander I believe.

 

[Andy Cardinal]

Great map!

 

[novushomus]

Lee also ordered Walker from the right flank (where Longstreet had exceeded his authority to place him, earning him a rebuke from Lee), and even pulled GT Anderson's brigade from Longstreet. You'll note from McLaws' AAR that whilst Longstreet ordered McLaws to send Anderson to him shortly afterwards he found Lee who countermanded that order.

His after action report says no such thing. The last time Anderson's division is mentioned in McLaws's report is that he returned to hasten Anderson's march after meeting Longstreet, aside from briefly mentioning Armistead's brigade in a cooperative engagement with McLaws's division. In his report, General Lee only told McLaws to halt his division and said nothing about Anderson's or countermanding Longstreet's order.

 

[Bruce Vail]

Hill was transferred but his division remained with the Army of Northern Virginia. Lee apparently did not have a high opinion of Hill's abilities in command of a division, although he was a good combat commander I believe.

I am really enjoying our conversation today!

I've participated in several about Antietam on this forum over the last two years and always learn something new and interesting.

I had inquired before about the reasons for DH Hill's dismissal and the consensus seemed to be that he was a disagreeable, unpleasant old cuss and nobody liked him. Nobody, that is, except Stonewall Jackson, who was Hill's brother in law.

It seems to me that he performed splendidly at Antietam. He supported Jackson strongly in The Cornfield and helped stave off disaster there. Then he personally held the center of the Confederate line in the butchery at the Sunken Road.
While he certainly has to share credit with Jackson and Longstreet, it seems he did pretty well that day.

I guess he took a lot of flack for South Mountain, but if the Sunken Road didn't compensate for that, then there is no justice in the world.

I have a theory I am working on that the senior officers of the ANV, Lee included, secretly blamed him for the Lost Order. That's the real reason he lost his command.

 

[Andy Cardinal]

I like

I am really enjoying our conversation today!

I've participated in several about Antietam on this forum over the last two years and always learn something new and interesting.

I had inquired before about the reasons for DH Hill's dismissal and the consensus seemed to be that he was a disagreeable, unpleasant old cuss and nobody liked him. Nobody, that is, except Stonewall Jackson, who was Hill's brother in law.

It seems to me that he performed splendidly at Antietam. He supported Jackson strongly in The Cornfield and helped stave off disaster there. Then he personally held the center of the Confederate line in the butchery at the Sunken Road.
While he certainly has to share credit with Jackson and Longstreet, it seems he did pretty well that day.

I guess he took a lot of flack for South Mountain, but if the Sunken Road didn't compensate for that, then there is no justice in the world.

I have a theory I am working on that the senior officers of the ANV, Lee included, secretly blamed him for the Lost Order. That's the real reason he lost his command.

I like your theory... It makes some sense to me. Hill may have been "disagreeable," but then again so was Jubal Early and Lee didn't seem to have a problem with him.

 

[67th Tigers]

I am really enjoying our conversation today!

I've participated in several about Antietam on this forum over the last two years and always learn something new and interesting.

I had inquired before about the reasons for DH Hill's dismissal and the consensus seemed to be that he was a disagreeable, unpleasant old cuss and nobody liked him. Nobody, that is, except Stonewall Jackson, who was Hill's brother in law.

It seems to me that he performed splendidly at Antietam. He supported Jackson strongly in The Cornfield and helped stave off disaster there. Then he personally held the center of the Confederate line in the butchery at the Sunken Road.
While he certainly has to share credit with Jackson and Longstreet, it seems he did pretty well that day.

I guess he took a lot of flack for South Mountain, but if the Sunken Road didn't compensate for that, then there is no justice in the world.

I have a theory I am working on that the senior officers of the ANV, Lee included, secretly blamed him for the Lost Order. That's the real reason he lost his command.

I go with the late Joseph Harsh's reading on DH Hill. Essentially he'd already been written off for a corps by Lee. Whilst successful in previous campaigns he got some blame for the debacle at Malvern Hill and he failing to stop McClellan securing a bridgehead across the James in late July. Hence "his" wing was dismantled by Lee in September '62.

Lee really didn't want DH Hill to have a corps. When the discussions were underway about forming formal corps Lee recommended his three best generals as he saw it - Longstreet, Jackson and AP Hill. Jeff Davis' reply has not survived, but Lee replied to the lost letter by formally asking for only Longstreet and Jackson to get Lt Gen rank. Now Davis was a stickler for seniority, and of officers actually with the army (ignoring GW Smith and Ewell, both very senior*) the line of major-generals went:

1. Longstreet (Major-general rank dated 7th Oct 61)
2. Jackson (ditto, but below Longstreet on the list as BG, which ultimately was from their old US Army seniority)
3. DH Hill (26th Mar 62)
4. AP Hill (ditto, but lower on the list)
5. McLaws (23rd May 62)
6. RH Anderson (14th July 62)

Now when DH Hill was reassigned in spring 63 Lee was preparing to reorganise his army back into three corps even before Jackson was shot. Lee really didn't like DH Hill.

* GW Smith ranked Longstreet and Ewell was between Jackson and DH Hill.

 

[Bruce Vail]

I go with the late Joseph Harsh's reading on DH Hill. Essentially he'd already been written off for a corps by Lee. Whilst successful in previous campaigns he got some blame for the debacle at Malvern Hill and he failing to stop McClellan securing a bridgehead across the James in late July. Hence "his" wing was dismantled by Lee in September '62.

Lee really didn't want DH Hill to have a corps. When the discussions were underway about forming formal corps Lee recommended his three best generals as he saw it - Longstreet, Jackson and AP Hill. Jeff Davis' reply has not survived, but Lee replied to the lost letter by formally asking for only Longstreet and Jackson to get Lt Gen rank. Now Davis was a stickler for seniority, and of officers actually with the army (ignoring GW Smith and Ewell, both very senior*) the line of major-generals went:

1. Longstreet (Major-general rank dated 7th Oct 61)
2. Jackson (ditto, but below Longstreet on the list as BG, which ultimately was from their old US Army seniority)
3. DH Hill (26th Mar 62)
4. AP Hill (ditto, but lower on the list)
5. McLaws (23rd May 62)
6. RH Anderson (14th July 62)

Now when DH Hill was reassigned in spring 63 Lee was preparing to reorganise his army back into three corps even before Jackson was shot. Lee really didn't like DH Hill.

* GW Smith ranked Longstreet and Ewell was between Jackson and DH Hill.

A young lieutenant in the 3rd N.C. didn't like Hill much either.

Lt. Edward Hall Armstrong, just 22 years old, wrote to his father shortly after Antietam to inform the folks back home that he had been arrested and faced a court martial.

Turns out that Gen. Hill had ordered that those soldiers in his division without proper shoes should be supplied with rawhide moccasains, which were then available because a herd of cattle had just been slaughtered for a beef ration. Observing the next day that a number of soldiers were still barefoot, he ordered the arrest of officers who had failed to carry out his orders.

Young Ned Armstrong was arrested, but the older officers in the regiment protested. Seems that the cowhides had been used up before all the soldiers were properly shod. Armstrong had followed orders, but the supply of cowhide was simply insufficient.

Hill relented, but not before Armstrong joked to his father that the older man might not receive many more letters from the son "because Gen. Hill may have me shot."

Hill, in addition to whatever other faults he may have had, was something of a martinet.

 

[Bruce Vail]

I go with the late Joseph Harsh's reading on DH Hill. Essentially he'd already been written off for a corps by Lee. Whilst successful in previous campaigns he got some blame for the debacle at Malvern Hill and he failing to stop McClellan securing a bridgehead across the James in late July. Hence "his" wing was dismantled by Lee in September '62.

Lee really didn't want DH Hill to have a corps. When the discussions were underway about forming formal corps Lee recommended his three best generals as he saw it - Longstreet, Jackson and AP Hill. Jeff Davis' reply has not survived, but Lee replied to the lost letter by formally asking for only Longstreet and Jackson to get Lt Gen rank. Now Davis was a stickler for seniority, and of officers actually with the army (ignoring GW Smith and Ewell, both very senior*) the line of major-generals went:

1. Longstreet (Major-general rank dated 7th Oct 61)
2. Jackson (ditto, but below Longstreet on the list as BG, which ultimately was from their old US Army seniority)
3. DH Hill (26th Mar 62)
4. AP Hill (ditto, but lower on the list)
5. McLaws (23rd May 62)
6. RH Anderson (14th July 62)

Now when DH Hill was reassigned in spring 63 Lee was preparing to reorganise his army back into three corps even before Jackson was shot. Lee really didn't like DH Hill.

* GW Smith ranked Longstreet and Ewell was between Jackson and DH Hill.

Seems like General Hill's career was in decline before he ever got to Frederick, Md.

What you say makes sense. Lee was pretty new to the command of the ANV and he faced the immediate need to make staff changes to suit his own methods of operation. D.H. Hill just didn't fit in.

 

[Bruce Vail]

I go with the late Joseph Harsh's reading on DH Hill. Essentially he'd already been written off for a corps by Lee. Whilst successful in previous campaigns he got some blame for the debacle at Malvern Hill and he failing to stop McClellan securing a bridgehead across the James in late July. Hence "his" wing was dismantled by Lee in September '62.

Lee really didn't want DH Hill to have a corps. When the discussions were underway about forming formal corps Lee recommended his three best generals as he saw it - Longstreet, Jackson and AP Hill. Jeff Davis' reply has not survived, but Lee replied to the lost letter by formally asking for only Longstreet and Jackson to get Lt Gen rank. Now Davis was a stickler for seniority, and of officers actually with the army (ignoring GW Smith and Ewell, both very senior*) the line of major-generals went:

1. Longstreet (Major-general rank dated 7th Oct 61)
2. Jackson (ditto, but below Longstreet on the list as BG, which ultimately was from their old US Army seniority)
3. DH Hill (26th Mar 62)
4. AP Hill (ditto, but lower on the list)
5. McLaws (23rd May 62)
6. RH Anderson (14th July 62)

Now when DH Hill was reassigned in spring 63 Lee was preparing to reorganise his army back into three corps even before Jackson was shot. Lee really didn't like DH Hill.

* GW Smith ranked Longstreet and Ewell was between Jackson and DH Hill.

I haven't read Harsh, but I hear a lot of good things.

I have committed mentally to reading Ezra Carman first. It might be a while before I get to Harsh.

BTW -- would you mind messaging back with a short summary of how he got some of the blame for the debacle at Malvern Hill? That's new to me...

 

[Andy Cardinal]

Here is a good thread about Hill that I discovered that talks about some of this:

https://civilwartalk.com/threads/what-was-it-about-d-h-hill-that-bothered-lee-so-much.114883/

 

[Bruce Vail]

Here is a good thread about Hill that I discovered that talks about some of this:

https://civilwartalk.com/threads/what-was-it-about-d-h-hill-that-bothered-lee-so-much.114883/

Hah! I looked that thread up earlier today.

My budding theory on the Lost Order is that Jackson also held a low opinion of D.H. Hill, but had to hold his tongue for the sake of family peace (recall that Jackson's wife was the sister of Hill's wife).

Could it be that Jackson went behind D.H. Hill's back in some way, and influenced Lee to get rid of Hill? I think it is possible. Certainly Jackson could have defended Hill (to Lee) and saved Hill's job as a divisional commander in the ANV, if he had wanted. But he didn't.

 

[rpkennedy]

Hah! I looked that thread up earlier today.

My budding theory on the Lost Order is that Jackson also held a low opinion of D.H. Hill, but had to hold his tongue for the sake of family peace (recall that Jackson's wife was the sister of Hill's wife).

Could it be that Jackson went behind D.H. Hill's back in some way, and influenced Lee to get rid of Hill? I think it is possible. Certainly Jackson could have defended Hill (to Lee) and saved Hill's job as a divisional commander in the ANV, if he had wanted. But he didn't.

I don't think that Jackson could have saved Hill. Lee had no problem getting rid of people who he thought were hindering the efficiency of the army (look what happened after the Seven Days) and I think Hill's personality qualifies as doing that.

From my reading, Hill and Jackson actually got along rather well which surprised a lot of people because of Hill's acerbic wit.

Ryan

 

[Andy Cardinal]

Hah! I looked that thread up earlier today.

My budding theory on the Lost Order is that Jackson also held a low opinion of D.H. Hill, but had to hold his tongue for the sake of family peace (recall that Jackson's wife was the sister of Hill's wife).

Could it be that Jackson went behind D.H. Hill's back in some way, and influenced Lee to get rid of Hill? I think it is possible. Certainly Jackson could have defended Hill (to Lee) and saved Hill's job as a divisional commander in the ANV, if he had wanted. But he didn't.

That is an interesting thought.

It seems to me that there was probably more of this kind of thing in the Army of Northern Virginia than most histories let on. The dissention in Bragg's army is well known, and the political infighting in the Army of the Potomac has also been well covered. I feel like the general impression is that everybody got along well in Lee's army, but there were some pretty strong personalities in that army. I may be wrong in this interpretation, but I think that would be an interesting field of study.

 

[Bruce Vail]

Some interesting detail about Hill's pre-war years:

On November 2, 1848, Hill married Isabella Morrison, daughter of Robert Hall Morrison, the first president of Davidson College, and granddaughter of General Joseph Graham, who had seen extensive service in the Revolutionary War, including the Battle of Charlotte, and the Battle of Cowan's Ford on the Catawba River.

An intelligent woman with requisite Presbyterian piety, Isabella had met "Harvey" while he was visiting one of his married sisters, who lived near Cottage Home, the residence of the Morrisons in Lincoln County, North Carolina.

In February, 1849, D. H. Hill resigned from the army and traveled with his young bride to Lexington, Va., where he accepted a position as a Professor of Mathematics at Washington College. "I have never regretted leaving the service," he wrote some years later.49

It was in Lexington, Va. that he renewed his acquaintance with Thomas J. Jackson, later "Stonewall" Jackson, whom he had met during the Mexican War. Hill played no small part in Jackson's obtaining a teaching position at the Virginia Military Institute, also in Lexington, in 1851. Indeed, he recommended Jackson for the job.

In a letter he wrote to D. H. Hill, Jr. on February 8, 1890, C. D. Fishburne gave a poignant description of his early encounters with his mathematics instructor at Washington College. "He was then comparatively a young man, wore full whiskers but no mustache, was slightly built, of serious aspect, to us youngsters at least."50

Fishburne went on to explain that the students were surprised by Hill's generally disheveled appearance. Unlike the other West Point graduates who taught at Washington College, he was "careless in his dress," Fishburne declared, "a fact that impressed us the more because we knew him as having been an officer of the U.S. Army."51

His students at Washington College, as mentioned earlier, held Daniel Harvey Hill in highest esteem as a teacher. "He was regarded as strictly impartial and very generous in recognizing and encouraging any originality and unusual ability among his pupils," said Fishburne.52

Credit: http://www.cmhpf.org/personalities/dhhill.html

 

[rpkennedy]

That is an interesting thought.

It seems to me that there was probably more of this kind of thing in the Army of Northern Virginia than most histories let on. The dissention in Bragg's army is well known, and the political infighting in the Army of the Potomac has also been well covered. I feel like the general impression is that everybody got along well in Lee's army, but there were some pretty strong personalities in that army. I may be wrong in this interpretation, but I think that would be an interesting field of study.

There is a long list of men who didn't measure up to Lee's standards who were reassigned, particularly after the Seven Days when the Army had a bit of a breather. Theophilus Holmes, John Magruder, Benjamin Huger, and William Whiting come to mind.

Ryan

 

[Andy Cardinal]

There is a long list of men who didn't measure up to Lee's standards who were reassigned, particularly after the Seven Days when the Army had a bit of a breather. Theophilus Holmes, John Magruder, Benjamin Huger, and William Whiting come to mind.

Ryan

Yes, that is true. Also A. P. Hill's inability to get along with Jackson and Longstreet is well known. I guess I mean more the politics of it all. The only reference I can recall is the idea that you had to be a Virginian to gain promotion in the Army of Northern Virginia. I think McLaws said something to that effect? Beliefs like that had to lead to resentment on the part of some of the officers.