The Battle of Antietam: A Perspective

Now, this isn't the only way to estimate casualties from Antietam. Another way would be to determine Lee's state immediately post-Second-Bull-Run, compare to his 30th September state (where his stragglers who didn't cross the Potomac had joined back up) and see what the difference is.

Would this method be preferable?

Certainly the Confederate post-battle casualty reports provably do not tell the whole story.
 
Last edited:
At the top level

2nd September = 75,528 minus cavalry at 4,155 = 71,373
30th September = 52,790 excluding cavalry
difference = 18,583

18,500 casualties is the estimate that all inclusive estimates converge on.
 
Certainly the Confederate post-battle casualty reports provably do not tell the whole story.

Provable only in your own mind. In reality, Lee’s numbers work out perfectly. You’re simply forgetting that a large amount of men who were listed as wounded actually died soon after the battles and their bodies were left to be buried with the men who died on the field.
 
Provable only in your own mind. In reality, Lee’s numbers work out perfectly.
Okay, so how many casualties did the eighteen regiments with no individual casualty counts posted suffer?

How is it that Lee reported only a thousand or so MIA when the prison camps absorbed several thousand unwounded prisoners?

You’re simply forgetting that a large amount of men who were listed as wounded actually died soon after the battles and their bodies were left to be buried with the men who died on the field.
That's not actually something that's been stated in so many words by a source... but even if it were true it would only account for a thousand or so of the discrepancy (it would mean double counting of about a thousand men as both wounded and dead). It doesn't explain the MIA problem, and it also doesn't explain the fact that there were 690 men buried south of the Potomac (having been evacuated and then died of wounds).

Since you state that Lee's numbers work out perfectly, would you be so kind as to elucidate how many you think fall into each category and how many of them are double counts? (KIA, MWIA, WIA, MIA unwounded). Remember that Lee's total MIA count given is less than 2,000...
 
Okay, so how many casualties did the eighteen regiments with no individual casualty counts posted suffer?

Maybe few to none? Maybe you’re wrong? Most likely you’re wrong.

How is it that Lee reported only a thousand or so MIA when the prison camps absorbed several thousand unwounded prisoners?

Evidence?

That's not actually something that's been stated in so many words by a source

On the contrary, the National Park Service estimates that, on average, about 1 out of 7 wounded men died. I already posted the link.

...but even if it were true it would only account for a thousand or so of the discrepancy (it would mean double counting of about a thousand men as both wounded and dead).

No double counting necessary.

1,871 KIA
9,312 WIA, of these, approx. 1,330 probably died.

You’re making this complicated because you’re trying to obfuscate.

It doesn't explain the MIA problem,

There is no MIA problem.

and it also doesn't explain the fact that there were 690 men buried south of the Potomac (having been evacuated and then died of wounds).

Maybe that’s because only about 2,800 confederates were buried north of the Potomac? Or maybe you’re wrong again?

Since you state that Lee's numbers work out perfectly, would you be so kind as to elucidate how many you think fall into each category and how many of them are double counts? (KIA, MWIA, WIA, MIA unwounded). Remember that Lee's total MIA count given is less than 2,000...

I’ve already posted the relevant figures several times.
 
Maybe few to none? Maybe you’re wrong? Most likely you’re wrong.

So, 18 regiments were so badly hit there weren't enough officers left to count the survivors. Care to guess whether they had a lot of casualties or none? I see you think none.

Evidence?

So, after Antietam Letterman reported taking 2,500 wounded prisoners into his hospitals (OR 19(2), 111), and additionally roughly 1,500 slightly wounded prisoners were sent to Fort Henry (History of the 18th Connecticut, pg 32). When either group were recovered they were sent to Fort Delaware for processing and either swearing the oath or exchange.

On 29th September there were 3,000 prisoners from Lee's Army in Fort Delaware (OR ser 2 vol 4, pg 575) and on 7th October 82 officers, 2,192 white troops and 19 black "troops" were exchanged at Aitken's Landing (ibid, 606-7). One assumes the remainder took the oath, which is about normal. They'd emptied the prisons in a big exchange on 15th September, and so all prisoners are from the Maryland campaign.

The number of prisoners McClellan gained may have been as high as 7,000.
 
Maybe few to none? Maybe you’re wrong? Most likely you’re wrong.
Well, I'm clearly right that their wounded aren't recorded in Confederate records because they recorded by regiment and those eighteen regiments do not appear.
It is also clearly the case that it is not "none" because several of those regiments lost their commanding officer wounded or killed at Antietam. Indeed, Thomas M. Garrett, commanding the 5th North Carolina, makes clear that they did suffer casualties and that he had submitted a casualty report, but that it was not found to be included in the ORs. (This is the footnote on Vol 19 Pt 1 Pg 1045).
Zeroing out the casualties of regiments whose casualty counts were lost means underestimating the casualties, perhaps severely...
As another example, the 5th Florida went through two wounded commanding offices (the colonel and the lieutenant colonel). No casualty return for them either.






1,871 KIA
9,312 WIA, of these, approx. 1,330 probably died.

I see, thank you. And no MIA?

I’ve already posted the relevant figures several times.
What I'm trying to do is to ensure that when I present evidence and arguments I am presenting it against what you actually believe to be the case; I do not want to misrepresent you.

My current understanding of your presentation of the situation is that:

1,871 Confederates died immediately, or before being registered wounded.
9,312 were wounded and registered as wounded. Of these, about 1,330 died, but of that group 690 were transported south of the Potomac and were considered "wounded" when the WIA count was made but were buried before the army moved out.
And some number (which I don't have your understanding of from you as yet) were captured and were thus MIA.

This means that the total number of casualties aside from the MIA and MWIA is 11,183, with 1,330 double counted as wounded and as burials.
 
Last edited:
So, 18 regiments were so badly hit there weren't enough officers left to count the survivors. Care to guess whether they had a lot of casualties or none? I see you think none.

Please provide a source so I can count each regiment myself. For obvious reasons, I don’t trust how you two count.

So, after Antietam Letterman reported taking 2,500 wounded prisoners into his hospitals (OR 19(2), 111), and additionally roughly 1,500 slightly wounded prisoners were sent to Fort Henry (History of the 18th Connecticut, pg 32). When either group were recovered they were sent to Fort Delaware for processing and either swearing the oath or exchange.

On 29th September there were 3,000 prisoners from Lee's Army in Fort Delaware (OR ser 2 vol 4, pg 575) and on 7th October 82 officers, 2,192 white troops and 19 black "troops" were exchanged at Aitken's Landing (ibid, 606-7). One assumes the remainder took the oath, which is about normal. They'd emptied the prisons in a big exchange on 15th September, and so all prisoners are from the Maryland campaign.

I can’t help but notice that almost all those numbers are big round guesses and thus worthless. The October 7 prisoner exchange probably included prisoners from previous battles, regardless of your groundless assertion that the union prisons were completely emptied before Antietam.

The number of prisoners McClellan gained may have been as high as 7,000.

Do you ever stop to take a step back and think about how ridiculous you sound? 7,000 prisoners!
 
Please provide a source so I can count each regiment myself. For obvious reasons, I don’t trust how you two count.

By definition they aren't in the returns!

I can’t help but notice that almost all those numbers are big round guesses and thus worthless. The October 7 prisoner exchange probably included prisoners from previous battles, regardless of your groundless assertion that the union prisons were completely emptied before Antietam.

As I said, on the 15th September the eastern forts were all emptied and sent to Aitken's Landing to enable as much as possible of the Harper's Ferry capture to be exchanged immediately.

Do you ever stop to take a step back and think about how ridiculous you sound? 7,000 prisoners!

Yes, upto 7,000 prisoners. Lee's army suffered it's single biggest pounding of the war!
 
Please provide a source so I can count each regiment myself. For obvious reasons, I don’t trust how you two count.
I compared the order of battle at Antietam (Wikipedia) with the report on Confederate casualties post Antietam (in the ORs) brigade by brigade. That's how I got the units listed off.

Now, some of them are very small, but some other small units were included in the returns - and one entire brigade was missed.


Do you ever stop to take a step back and think about how ridiculous you sound? 7,000 prisoners!
Yes, imagine 7,000 prisoners being captured in the Antietam area. It's over the river that huge captures take place...

Though an army which suffers severe disruption is quite capable of losing a large number of troops MIA (thus captured) even if it doesn't shatter. At Shiloh 3,000 Union troops were captured, while at Chickamauga there were 4,800 Union troops captured and at Spotsylvania the Confederate MIA rose to 5,800; Chancellorsville saw 6,000 Union troops captured and at Gettysburg both sides suffered in the ballpark of 5,000-6,000 captured.
 
Though an army which suffers severe disruption is quite capable of losing a large number of troops MIA (thus captured) even if it doesn't shatter. At Shiloh 3,000 Union troops were captured, while at Chickamauga there were 4,800 Union troops captured and at Spotsylvania the Confederate MIA rose to 5,800; Chancellorsville saw 6,000 Union troops captured and at Gettysburg both sides suffered in the ballpark of 5,000-6,000 captured.

Lee didn’t suffer severe disruption. His line barely moved. Roughly 1,000 confederates were captured at Antietam.
 
They didn’t. Just another groundless assertion.

Except that number is recorded....

Sure it is a "groundless assertion" to suggest that Lee's starving and shattered army, reeling from the bloodiest day of combat in U.S. history, a day which them indisputably lost, didn't end up surrendering in droves?
 
Lee didn’t suffer severe disruption. His line barely moved.
Really? At the end of the battle, no Confederate units remained east of Sharpsburg, when, at the beginning of the battle, all of the ANV was east of the town except A.P. Hill's division which arrived late. The Sunken Road (with the possible exception of Marye's Heights) was the most formidable defensive position either army held until the onset of serious entrenchments in 1864 and the rebels were "disrupted" out of that. Per Ezra Carman, recognized as one of the foremost experts on the battle, the ANV suffered at least 10,500 casualties. By any possible definition, that constitutes a pretty severe disruption.
 
Really? At the end of the battle, no Confederate units remained east of Sharpsburg, when, at the beginning of the battle, all of the ANV was east of the town except A.P. Hill's division which arrived late. The Sunken Road (with the possible exception of Marye's Heights) was the most formidable defensive position either army held until the onset of serious entrenchments in 1864 and the rebels were "disrupted" out of that. Per Ezra Carman, recognized as one of the foremost experts on the battle, the ANV suffered at least 10,500 casualties. By any possible definition, that constitutes a pretty severe disruption.

You’re right, 10,500 confederate casualties is severe. 1,000 captured confederates is severe. I shouldn’t have tried to minimize that.
 
You’re right, 10,500 confederate casualties is severe. 1,000 captured confederates is severe. I shouldn’t have tried to minimize that.

Yep, and the 18,500 losses Lee actually received were so much worse! In perspective, McClellan inflicted 60% of the damage that Grant inflicted in the Overland Campaign.

Add in the Seven Days and 2nd Bull Run and things were much deadlier than the Overland in a similar timespan.
 
You’re right, 10,500 confederate casualties is severe. 1,000 captured confederates is severe. I shouldn’t have tried to minimize that.
But as I've cited most of the other large battles of the war involved far more MIA than that.


Here's the ten costliest Civil War battles by the casualty count (on Wikipedia), and how many MIA there were on both sides.
Gettysburg 11,000 MIA
Chickamauga 6,200 MIA
Spotsylvania 8,000 MIA
Chancellorsville 8,000 MIA
Wilderness 5,100 MIA
Stones River 6,100 MIA
Shiloh 3,700 MIA
Antietam 1,800 MIA (wiki)
Second Bull Run 4,300 MIA
Fredericksburg 1,500 MIA

At Fredericksburg the low MIA count can be explained by how the Union made almost no progress and the Confederates didn't leave their fortified positions. No such explanation can be given for Antietam as it involved considerable forward progress.


Meanwhile, don't think that the claim about the thousands of prisoners is only direct from McClellan - Gene Thorp's article in the Washington Post cites Letterman reporting 2,500 wounded Confederates under his care following the battle.

From Thorp's article:

McClellan's medical director, Jonathan Letterman, reported after the campaign that he had 2,500 wounded Confederates under his care. Undoubtably, some of these men died in Union hospitals and likely account for those buried in Frederick as well as a few of those buried in Hagerstown.


At the same time, unwounded Confederates captured from the campaign were sent to Fort Delaware, near Wilmington, and Fort McHenry in Baltimore. On Sept. 15, General John E. Wool, who commanded forces in Maryland not under McClellan's control, was ordered to send all captured rebels from the pending battles to Fort Delaware. The first wave of prisoners, 1,400 in all, came from the battle of South Mountain. They were sent from Frederick to Baltimore on Sept. 17 as the battle of Antietam raged 20 miles away. More followed after Antietam and the number of Confederate prisoners in Fort Delaware swelled from 60 on Sept. 9, to some 3,000 by Sept. 29.


Both sides were anxious to quickly exchange prisoners and on Oct. 8., 2,274 of the Fort Delaware prisoners were returned to Confederate lines. An additional 224 Confederates from Fort McHenry were exchanged on Oct. 18. It is unclear what became of the remaining 700 prisoners at Fort Delaware. They may have been exchanged at a later date or were perhaps over-counted in the Sept. 29. report. Since documentation on these men at the present time can not be found, they have been excluded from the total captured. Even so, the two types of Confederate prisoners total 5,000 men, more than twice the amount reported by the rebels.

(Emphasis mine.)

Since no significant captures of Confederates were made at Second Bull Run and no other major battle took place in September (and Richmond Kentucky saw one Confederate MIA), the captures must have been in the Maryland campaign.
 
Lee didn’t suffer severe disruption. His line barely moved. Roughly 1,000 confederates were captured at Antietam.
Let's have a look at the casualties from one of the battles where an army was forced back but held the line, and pro-rata them to match the casualties from Antietam. For now we'll assume that Antietam non-MIA casualties were on the order of 11,000.


Union force at Shiloh:
ca. 10,000 non-MIA casualties, 2,885 MIA casualties
Expected Antietam MIA: about 3,000
Union force at Gettysburg:
ca. 18,000 non-MIA casualties, 5,400 MIA casualties
Expected Antietam MIA: about 3,300
Union force at Chickamauga
ca. 11,000 non-MIA casualties, 4,800 MIA casualties
Expected Antietam MIA: about 4,800
Confederate force at Spotsylvania
ca. 7,000 non-MIA casualties, 5,600 MIA casualties
Expected Antietam MIA: about 9,000
Union force at Chancellorsville
ca. 8,000 non-MIA casualties, 4,200 MIA casualties
Expected Antietam MIA: about 6,000
Union force at Stones River
ca. 9,000 non-MIA casualties, 3,700 MIA casualties
Expected Antietam MIA: about 4,500

Thus the Antietam MIA should be in the range of 3000-9000, with 5000-6000 being the most likely range.
 
Back
Top