Question about Union casualties at Fredericksburg

Harms88

Sergeant
Joined
Oct 13, 2019
Location
North of the Wall & South of the Canucks
My question specifically is what happened to the wounded in Gibbon's, Meade's and Birney's commands in the Grand Left Division. Were the wounded taken to Fredericksburg or were there hospitals established on the eastern or western banks of the Rapphanock for these men? I know they would established field hospitals in battles but I've never heard of any hospitals at Fredericksburg outside of the city itself, or specifically, locations of Union hospitals.
 
My question specifically is what happened to the wounded in Gibbon's, Meade's and Birney's commands in the Grand Left Division. Were the wounded taken to Fredericksburg or were there hospitals established on the eastern or western banks of the Rapphanock for these men? I know they would established field hospitals in battles but I've never heard of any hospitals at Fredericksburg outside of the city itself, or specifically, locations of Union hospitals.
I would look in newspaper reports of the battle, also those publishing letters home from soldiers.
 
The casualties from the battle were sent to 18 different field hospitals (one for each of the 18 Union divisions). The Federal left wing was sent to either the Smithfield mansion, a tent hospital (in a ravine near river), or Pollock house (north of Smithfield). In the center of Fredericksburg the courthouse and surrounding churches were used. The Federal right were sent to Phillip's house or Chatham (the Lacy House) at Falmouth. On the 14th 5,000 from the First and Sixth Corps were sent to Falmouth. Jonathan Letterman was the Director of the Medical Department of the Army of the Potomac who reorganized the medical department and made use of these reforms at Fredericksburg. This is found in an interesting article entitled: "The Medical History of the Fredericksburg Campaign: Course and Significance" in The Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences Vol. 18 No. 3 (July 1963). My great great grandfather fought at Marye's Heights and the day after the battle, December 15, was sick with neuralgia and sent to the hospital which was probably either Phillip's house or Chatham. He served with the 7th Michigan Regiment Company I of the Second Corps.
 
The casualties from the battle were sent to 18 different field hospitals (one for each of the 18 Union divisions). The Federal left wing was sent to either the Smithfield mansion, a tent hospital (in a ravine near river), or Pollock house (north of Smithfield). In the center of Fredericksburg the courthouse and surrounding churches were used. The Federal right were sent to Phillip's house or Chatham (the Lacy House) at Falmouth. On the 14th 5,000 from the First and Sixth Corps were sent to Falmouth. Jonathan Letterman was the Director of the Medical Department of the Army of the Potomac who reorganized the medical department and made use of these reforms at Fredericksburg. This is found in an interesting article entitled: "The Medical History of the Fredericksburg Campaign: Course and Significance" in The Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences Vol. 18 No. 3 (July 1963). My great great grandfather fought at Marye's Heights and the day after the battle, December 15, was sick with neuralgia and sent to the hospital which was probably either Phillip's house or Chatham. He served with the 7th Michigan Regiment Company I of the Second Corps.

Thank you! This is what I was looking for. Sure, maybe not the exact "this brigade sends their wounded to this exact spot" but it gives me a very good idea of the general area.

I recently purchased The Fredericksburg Campaign: Winter War on the Rapphanock by Francis A. O'Reilly and he makes mention of that the wounded during the main phases of the battle were located in Fredericksburg and in field hospitals near the river and evacuated them on the 14th prior to the rest of the army's withdrawal but never state on where these men would than have been tended.

Although I didn't realize that Fredericksburg had one of the lowest mortality rate for wounded in the entire war, at the comparitively low rate of only 1 in 4 unlike the more usually 1 in 3.
 
Although I didn't realize that Fredericksburg had one of the lowest mortality rate for wounded in the entire war, at the comparitively low rate of only 1 in 4 unlike the more usually 1 in 3.
There's several possible causes of this. Myself I have to wonder whether part of it was how many mortally wounded men were actually captured wounded by the CSA, because there were so many assaults over the same ground but they didn't push the line back. At places like Antietam the attackers pushed the enemy line back a bit and so would be able to recover their own badly mortally wounded.

It could also be due to the truce to tend to the wounded on the 14th. At many other battles where there was a lot of intense fighting on a single day (Antietam, say) either there was no subsequent truce or there wasn't one the next day, while obviously for a multi-day fight you have people wounded on the first day and no truce on the second day.
 
O'Reilly's book is a great account of Fredericksburg. I also recommend Fredericksburg! Fredericksburg! by George Rable.
 
There's several possible causes of this. Myself I have to wonder whether part of it was how many mortally wounded men were actually captured wounded by the CSA, because there were so many assaults over the same ground but they didn't push the line back. At places like Antietam the attackers pushed the enemy line back a bit and so would be able to recover their own badly mortally wounded.

It could also be due to the truce to tend to the wounded on the 14th. At many other battles where there was a lot of intense fighting on a single day (Antietam, say) either there was no subsequent truce or there wasn't one the next day, while obviously for a multi-day fight you have people wounded on the first day and no truce on the second day.
The Gordon W. Jones' article also states the interesting fact that the Second Corps wounds at Fredericksburg were mostly in the upper extremities (900) and that there were only 130 chest or abdomen wounds. Maybe a factor in mortality, and also the fact that the Confederates did not counter-attack. I also read in the article that treatment was so organized that the wounded were treated within 24 hours. But also the article notes that many Union wounded were trapped on the ground before the wall at Marye's Heights, so one would wonder how many were taken prisoner and not counted.
 
The Gordon W. Jones' article also states the interesting fact that the Second Corps wounds at Fredericksburg were mostly in the upper extremities (900) and that there were only 130 chest or abdomen wounds. Maybe a factor in mortality, and also the fact that the Confederates did not counter-attack. I also read in the article that treatment was so organized that the wounded were treated within 24 hours. But also the article notes that many Union wounded were trapped on the ground before the wall at Marye's Heights, so one would wonder how many were taken prisoner and not counted.
What I have to wonder about that is the extent to which the full data disambiguates wound causes, because:

A serious hit by a musket ball (inlcuding minie) could lead to someone entering the hospital system and then expiring. An equally serious hit with a cannister ball could lead to the person expiring straight away and not entering the hospital system in the first place.
A mild hit by a musket ball can then turn septic etc. and kill someone by infection, while an artillery hit in the same way might well also kill someone straight off.

That is, you need to think about the KIA/WIA ratio as well as the MWIA/WIA ratio. I believe it's also the case that different weapons have different survivorship profiles.
 
I've mentioned this before, but for good personal narratives concerning Fredericksburg wounded, William McCarter's My Life In the Irish Brigade (he was seriously wounded, lying one or two nights in front of the Stone Wall) and Louisa May Alcott's Hospital Sketches give excellent ideas of what went on:

 
There's several possible causes of this. Myself I have to wonder whether part of it was how many mortally wounded men were actually captured wounded by the CSA, because there were so many assaults over the same ground but they didn't push the line back. At places like Antietam the attackers pushed the enemy line back a bit and so would be able to recover their own badly mortally wounded.

It could also be due to the truce to tend to the wounded on the 14th. At many other battles where there was a lot of intense fighting on a single day (Antietam, say) either there was no subsequent truce or there wasn't one the next day, while obviously for a multi-day fight you have people wounded on the first day and no truce on the second day.

The Christian Society actually organized a massive relief operation for the Union wounded at Fredericksburg and provided a ton of supplies, food and personnel to help with the otherwise overwhelmed doctors. So many wounded ended up being seen far sooner and by medical professionals in much more fit condition than you usually would find.
 
The Christian Society actually organized a massive relief operation for the Union wounded at Fredericksburg and provided a ton of supplies, food and personnel to help with the otherwise overwhelmed doctors. So many wounded ended up being seen far sooner and by medical professionals in much more fit condition than you usually would find.
Interesting. Given contemporary travel times, I wonder if that was partly set up ahead of time and inspired by the immense carnage at Antietam.
 
What I have to wonder about that is the extent to which the full data disambiguates wound causes, because:

A serious hit by a musket ball (inlcuding minie) could lead to someone entering the hospital system and then expiring. An equally serious hit with a cannister ball could lead to the person expiring straight away and not entering the hospital system in the first place.
A mild hit by a musket ball can then turn septic etc. and kill someone by infection, while an artillery hit in the same way might well also kill someone straight off.

That is, you need to think about the KIA/WIA ratio as well as the MWIA/WIA ratio. I believe it's also the case that different weapons have different survivorship profiles.
I agree with you. I can only imagine how many died trapped before the wall at Marye's Heights that were not carried off in time. I also think that upper extremity wounds threatened surviving considering the bullet used and the infection that too often resulted.
 
Interesting. Given contemporary travel times, I wonder if that was partly set up ahead of time and inspired by the immense carnage at Antietam.
Yes. Antietam caused a change in how the medical department operated in making preparations. I am still amazed at how overwhelming the care for the wounded was after most Civil War battles must have been.
 
Yes. Antietam caused a change in how the medical department operated in making preparations. I am still amazed at how overwhelming the care for the wounded was after most Civil War battles must have been.
I do know that McClellan's army at Antietam suffered on the order of 9,500 wounded and on top of that they ended up capturing about 2,500 Confederate wounded, so there were ca. 12,000 being cared for in Union hospitals after the battle (plus ca. 9,000 Confederate wounded counted after the campaign). So we're talking ~20,000 wounded, or the equivalent of the entire population of Petersburg in 1860.
 
If only Buell had been even half as concerned for his own men. I was recently reading in Perryville: This Grand Havoc of Battle that he limited entire divisions to a single wagon of medical supplies. He also had great disdain for the medical profession in general and had an understaffed medical department.
 
I do know that McClellan's army at Antietam suffered on the order of 9,500 wounded and on top of that they ended up capturing about 2,500 Confederate wounded, so there were ca. 12,000 being cared for in Union hospitals after the battle (plus ca. 9,000 Confederate wounded counted after the campaign). So we're talking ~20,000 wounded, or the equivalent of the entire population of Petersburg in 1860.
Wow! My ancestor was with the Second Corps (Michigan 7th) and his regiment was mercilessly pounded as it entered the West Woods and as wheeled to the left then managed to withdraw. So I am amazed that he was not wounded. His company being the center of the regiment.
 
Wow! My ancestor was with the Second Corps (Michigan 7th) and his regiment was mercilessly pounded as it entered the West Woods and as wheeled to the left then managed to withdraw. So I am amazed that he was not wounded. His company being the center of the regiment.
2nd Corps suffered really heavily at Antietam, something like a third of the PFD strength and more of what was present, and the 7th MI suffered about 50% casualties as a fraction of those in the fight. So it was about a coin flip for him.
 
The Christian Society actually organized a massive relief operation for the Union wounded at Fredericksburg and provided a ton of supplies, food and personnel to help with the otherwise overwhelmed doctors. So many wounded ended up being seen far sooner and by medical professionals in much more fit condition than you usually would find.
By contrast, when his unit was being discharged two weeks after Chancellorsville, a Union major wrote that the train from Fredericksburg to the railhead at Aquia Creek was still receiving carloads of wounded that had just been brought in from the battlefield, with comments about how many must have died that could likely have been saved.
 
Back
Top