The 1962 Stinson Study: Eighth Entry

The situation in the West Woods at
09:00 hrs. Cope Map, 1908.

Fifty years ago, National Park Service historian Dwight E. Stinson, Jr. set out to “present a definitive study of the operations of Sedgwick’s Division at the Battle of Antietam.” 

What follows is the eighth (and last) entry from his report: Appendix E-Confederate Order of Battle.

"Appendix E--Confederate Order of Battle

From the Confederate viewpoint, the operations against Sedgwick's Division involved such an assortment of units and timing factors that they will be the subject of a separate report.

The diagrams in the body of this report indicate Confederate units present in the various phases of the action thus rendering a written resume of the units beyond the scope of the present project.

The Confederate forces which at one time or another engaged Sedgwick seem to have numbered between 7,000 and 10,000 men.



The table below lists the units and the estimate of their numbers as given by Palfrey and Allan.

	Palfrey[1]	Allan[2]
Early's Brigade of Lawton's Division	1,000	1,000
J.R. Jones' (Jackson's) Division (4 badly reduced brigades under Colonels Grigsby and Stafford)	600	300
McLaws' Division (Cobb's, Barksdale's, Kershaw's & Semmes' Brigades)	3,000	- - - -
McLaws' Division (less Cobb's Brigade)	- - - -	2,550
G.T. Anderson's Brigade of D.R. Jones' Division	600	600
Walker's Division (Ransom's and Manning's Brigades)	3,200	3,000
Other mixed units	1,600	- - - -
Total	10,000	7,450

It is believed that Allan's is the better estimate of the two because he deducts Cobb's Brigade which was engaged elsewhere and rather than attempt to estimate the numbers of the 'Mixed' units he states that, regardless of strength, they were made up for by the units of the I and XII Corps which were also in the general area.

This concentration of force to meet the crisis was effected through Lee's use of interior lines. The list below gives the units of the attack force and their location at 8:00, at which time Sedgwick's Division was already west of the Antietam.

McLaw's Division	In reserve at Lee's Headquarters, 2 miles from the Dunker Church.
G.T. Anderson's Brigade	In line of battle (not engaged) on the site of the National Cemetery, about 1 1/4 miles from the Dunker Church.
Walker's Division	On the extreme right of the line covering Snavely's Ford, about 2 1/2 miles from the Dunker Church.

It hardly needs to be mentioned that a serious Federal demonstration or attack directed against Lee's right between 8:00 and 9:00 would have compromised the allocation of these forces.

 The remainder of the Confederate Army was disposed as follows:

J.R. Jones' Division	On the left in the West Woods seriously depleted from the morning's combat.
Lawton's Division	In worse condition that above. Three of four brigades off the line attempting to regroup. Early's Brigade supporting Stuart and in good condition.
Hood's Division	Engaged in Cornfield-East Woods. Losses so heavy that it will be pulled off line before 9:00.
D.H. Hill's Division	Three brigades heavily engaged in support of Hood. Will be practically dispersed by 9:00. Other two brigades responsible for Sunken Road front.
Evan's Independent Brigade	Responsible for front between Sunken Road and Boonsboro Road.
D.R. Jones' Division	Responsible for long front between site of National Cemetery and Snavely's Ford.
R.H. Anderson's Division	In reserve at Lee's Headquarters
A.P. Hill's Division	In Harpers Ferry area, 8 hours removed from Sharpsburg.

Notes ====

Cope map is Antietam Battlefield Board, Maps of the Battlefield of Antietam. 14 sheets. Surveyed by Lieut. Col. E.B. Cope. Washington: United States War Department, 1904 and Revised 1908.

 [1] "Palfrey 89-90." Francis Winthrop Palfrey, The Antietam and Fredericksburg (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1882)."

 [2] "Allan, 405-406. William Allan, The Army of Northern Virginia in 1862 (Boston and New York: Houghton, Mifflin and Company, 1892).

The 1962 Stinson Study: Seventh Entry

Fifty years ago, National Park Service historian Dwight E. Stinson, Jr. set out to “present a definitive study of the operations of Sedgwick’s Division at the Battle of Antietam.” What follows is the seventh entry from his report: Appendix D-The "Ambush" Question.

--------
"Appendix D-The 'Ambush' Question

The West Woods 2013

Efforts have been made during the past year or so, on the part of the staff of the Antietam National Battlefield Site, to have the term 'ambush' condemned as a description of Sedgwick's defeat in the West Woods. The effort has been successful to the extent that labels in the new visitor center will refrain from use of the word. However, the heading 'Jackson Prepares an Ambush' has not yet been changed in the battlefield Handbook, nor the story of a deliberately laid trap which follows. Popular accounts of the battle have also propagated this misconception. There are two major reasons why it is important that Sedgwick's defeat should not be called an ambush.

1. An 'ambush' is defined as 'a post or tactical trap of troops in wait, concealed for the purpose of attacking an enemy by surprise.' The term carries a connotation of stealth and deliberate concealment. For reasons that will be denoted later, this simply did not occur. Use of the term 'ambush' implies that they did and is therefore incorrect.

2. Other parts of the battle story must conform when the term 'ambush' is used, thereby, giving rise to further false information. This is particularly true with the operations of Greene's Division and those of the 34th New York and 125th Pennsylvania, both of which must be misrepresented to clear the area where the 'ambush' is supposed to have been set up.

It is hope that the Operations section of this report has supplied evidence to discredit use of the term 'ambush' in connection with Sedgwick's defeat. The following points should bolster the facts in that section and prove beyond any doubt that no ambush took place in the West Woods.

1. Jackson made every effort to contain Sedgwick's advance and to drive him from the West Woods before McLaws and Walker arrived. This is evident by the artillery fire directed at Sedgwick during his approach and the desperate resistance encountered by Gorman's Brigade.

2. The 125th Pennsylvania and later the 34th New York were engaged in the very area where an ambush would have to have been set up, before the main part of Gorman's Brigade crossed the Pike.

3. If the above was not sufficient warning that trouble might be expected from the left, the fact that the two regiments were driven out before all of Sedgwick's Division entered the woods surely was. Colonel Owen of Howard's Brigade even suggested that the brigade oblique to the left to meet the danger. None of this implies the sudden springing of a carefully laid trap.

4. Confederate reports indicate that their reinforcements were committed to the attack upon arrival with no attempt at concealment or waiting for the opportune moment to strike. The following extracts from the reports of the commanders directly concerned with Sedgwick's defeat are offered to support this point. 

A. (Maj. Gen. T. J. Jackson) 'The force in front [of Early] (the 125th Pennsylvania and 34th New York) was giving way under this attack when another heavy column of Federal troops was seen moving across the plateau on his left flank. By this time, the expected re-enforcements...arrived, and the whole, including Grigsby's command, now united, charged upon the enemy, checking his advance, then driving him back with great slaughter entirely from and beyond the wood..." [1]

B. (Brig. Gen. J.G. Walker) '...we at once formed line of battle, and...the division, with Ransom's brigade on the left, advanced in splendid style, firing and cheering as they went, and in a few minutes cleared the woods, strewing it with the enemy's dead and wounded.' [2]

C. (Maj. Gen. L. McLaws) 'My advance was ordered before the entire line of General Kershaw could be formed. As the enemy were filling the woods so rapidly, I wished my troops to cross the open space between us and the woods before they were entirely occupied. It was made steadily and in perfect order, and the troops were immediately engaged, driving the enemy before them in magnificent style at all points, sweeping the woods with the perfect ease and inflicting great loss on the enemy.' [3]

D. (Brig. Gen. J.A. Early) (Narrative begins just after Early's Brigade had drive out the 125th Pennsylvania and 34th New York.) 'I also discovered another body of the enemy moving across the plateau on my left flank, in double-quick time, (Dana and Howard) to the same position, and I succeeded in arresting my command and ordered it to retire, so that I might change front and advance upon this force. Just as I reformed my line...McLaws' division came up, and the whole, including Grigsby's command, advanced upon this body of the enemy, driving it with great slaughter entirely from and beyond the woods..." [4]

To conclude this discussion it may be said on the basis of all available evidence, use of the term 'ambush' in reference to Sedgwick's defeat is not only misleading but grossly incorrect." [5]

Next: Appendix E--Confederate Order of Battle

Notes==========

Statements and words bracketed by (  ) and [   ] above are Stinson's.

[1] "O.R., 956 (Jackson)." Stinson notes in his bibliography that "All references [to the Official Records] are from Volume XIX, Part I unless otherwise cited. "[References] will be cited O.R. followed by the page number and the name of the person who submitted the report, as follows: O.R., 275 [Sumner]."

[2] "O.R., 915 (Walker)."

[3] "O.R., 858 (McLaws)."

[4] "O.R., 971 (Early)."

[5] "Longstreet 246 exhibits a diagram which shows Sedgwick's Division moving through the West Woods, passing across the fronts of J.R. Jones on its right and Walker on its left. Longstreet's account of the operation (pp. 245-248) is as incorrect as his diagram and bears no resemblance whatsoever to the West Woods action which it is supposed to be describing. This work is completely useless as reference material for this phase of the Battle of Antietam." James Longstreet, From Manassas to Appomattox (Philadelphia, J.B. Lippincott Co., 1896). 

{Author's note: "Ambush" in the West Woods has a long history. While neither Palfrey or Walker use the term in their studies of the fight in the West Woods, Carman, writing later, states "It would be a simple matter to say that Sedgwick's Division of 5,000 men marched into an ambush, ..." About a hundred years later,  September 2013 tour participants were promised that they would "walk the advance of Sedgwick's division to their impending ambush in the West Woods." }

The 1962 Stinson Study: Sixth Entry

Fifty years ago, National Park Service historian Dwight E. Stinson, Jr. set out to “present a definitive study of the operations of Sedgwick’s Division at the Battle of Antietam.” What follows is the sixth entry from his report: Appendix C-Accusation of Rashness.

"Appendix C--Accusation of Rashness

It is hoped that the complexities of the situation facing Sumner prior to his ordering Sedgwick forward have been discussed thoroughly in the Analysis Section of this report. Because of them, many writers of the battle have sought a simple explanation requiring little space but still satisfying the reader as to why a corps commander would voluntarily expose one of his divisions to annihilation and allow the other two to stray off without his guidance. This has led to two theories, which, because of their widespread belief, should be commented on.

Francis A. Walker
Duke University

The most common of these, seemingly coined by Palfrey and Walker, is that Sumner had spent 'all his life in the cavalry' and 'had the instincts of a cavalry commander.' [1] The implication of irresponsible charges at the head of madcap horsemen is clear and conveys the thought that Sumner plunged into the West Woods with the same amount of consideration he would have given to an attack against a band of hostile braves. The fact is, that while most of Sumner's 43 years service had been in the cavalry he was a trained officer and quite aware of the capabilities and employment of infantry. At least his first four years in the army had been spent as a lieutenant in the 2nd Infantry. [2] More significant is that his recent experiences as commander of an infantry corps on the Peninsula surely had made him aware that his capacity was no longer that of commanding a few companies on the Indian frontier.

The "headstrong" concept is carried along in the second theory and frequently the two are combined. This centers around the fact that Sumner had been ordered to hold the II Corps in readiness to march one hour before daybreak yet had not received the order to advance until 7:20. It is often said that Sumner became so agitated at the delay that when he finally was released, he rushed headlong into the action. But even in granting that he was not happy with a passive role, it is going beyond sound historical judgment to assign his hasty advance solely to this reason. It is unreasonable to suppose that an officer of Sumner's experience would discard common sense merely to get into action.

Two other theories should be given more credence and are, when the situation and Sumner's orders are considered, certainly more plausible. Ropes has stated one of these as follows:

'There can be little doubt that representations made to General Sumner of the urgent need of reinforcements on this part of the field of battle influenced him greatly, and account in great part for the impetuosity of his attack. ' [3]

This is closely allied with the fourth theory, advanced by Sumner's son, to the effect that the XII Corps has just about spent its offensive potential and to keep up the momentum of the attack Sumner had to throw in Sedgwick immediately. [4]

In summation, careful study of every known ramification of the problem leads the writer to the conclusion that the last two theories are correct. If the XII Corps successes were to be exploited they would have to be done so immediately, and by the II Corps, which, after all, had been committed for that very purpose in the first place. As we have stated in the analysis, Sumner's error was not in ordering an immediate advance but in accompanying it personally to the exclusion of this other units which would be needed to protect Sedgwick and drive the attack home."

Next--The "Ambush" Question

Source: Dwight E. Stinson, Jr. Operations of Sedgwick's Division. Unpublished, National Park Service Report, 1962. This typescript report is at the Antietam National Battlefield Library and Archives. All notes to Stinson's report are enclosed in quotes; bibliographic citations are from Stinson.

Notes:

1. "Walker, 103." Francis A. Walker, History of the Second Corps in the Army of the Potomac (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1886).

2. "Heitman I, 936." Francis B. Heitman, Historical Register and Dictionary of the United States Army. 2 Volumes (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1903).

3. "Ropes, 365-366." John C. Ropes, The Story of the Civil War: The Campaigns of 1862 (New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1898). 

4. "14 HMSM, 10 (S.S. Sumner)." Military Historical Society of Massachusetts, Papers of the Military Historical Society of Massachusetts. Volume XIV. Paper read by S[amuel] S. Sumner before the Society on 2 January, 1917.

The 1962 Stinson Study: Fourth Entry

Fifty years ago, National Park Service historian Dwight E. Stinson, Jr. set out to “present a definitive study of the operations of Sedgwick’s Division at the Battle of Antietam.” What follows is the fourth entry from his report: Appendix A-Casualties.

"Appendix A--Casualties[1]

(K-Killed; W-Wounded; M-Missing; Tot-Total)

Totals of Sedgwick's Infantry, Woodruff's Battery, and 125th Pennsylvania:
	K- 397	W- 1,1693	M- 246	Tot- 2,336
Second Division, II Corps (Sedgwick)
	K- 373	W- 1,593	M- 244	Tot- 2,210
1st Brigade (Gorman)
34th NY	K-33	W-111	M-10	TOT-154
82ND NY	K-21	W-92	M-15	TOT-128
15TH MA	K-65	W-225	M-24	TOT-344
1ST MN	K-15	W-81	M-15	TOT-114
Brigade Total	K-134	W-539	M-67	TOT-740
2nd Brigade (Howard)
69TH PA	K-19	W-58	M-15	TOT-92
71ST PA	K-26	W-95	M-18	TOT-139
72ND PA	K-38	W-163	M-36	TOT-237
106TH PA	K-10	W-63	M-4	TOT-77
Brigade Total	K-93	W-379	M-73	TOT-545
3rd Brigade (Dana)
Staff	K-0	W-2	M-0	TOT-2
7TH MI	K-39	W-178	M-4	TOT-221
42ND NY	K-35	W-127	M-19	TOT-181
59TH NY	K-48	W-127	M-19	TOT-224
19TH  MA	K-8	W-108	M-30	TOT-146
20TH  MA	K-12	W-84	M-28	TOT-124
Brigade Total	K-142	W-652	M-104	TOT-898
Artillery
Woodruff (I, 1st U.S.)	K-0	W-6	M-0	TOT-6
Tompkins (A, 1st R.I.)[2]	K-4	W-15	M-0	TOT-19
Other
125TH PA	K-28	W-115	M-2	TOT-145
Average Regimental Losses (Compared with other divisions of II Corps)
Sedgwick and 125th  PA	K-28	W-120	M-18	TOT-166
Richardson and French	K-22	W-98	M-7	TOT-127

Percentage of Casualties
42 per cent (based on 5,200 infantry engaged)

The following tables, unless otherwise stated, are based solely on the number of reported casualties. Efforts to correlate the losses with those of other engagements or other units at Antietam have been avoided because of the impossibility in determining numbers engaged, without which the figures would be meaningless.

Divisional Casualties

Ranked No. 1 of 15 infantry divisions reporting loss at Antietam.

Brigade Casualties

Dana's Brigade ranked No. 1 of 40 brigades reporting
Gorman's Brigade ranked No. 2 of 40 brigades reporting
Howard's Brigade ranked No. 8 of 40 brigades reporting

Regimental Casualties

15th Massachusetts ranked No. 1 of 173 regiments reporting loss.
72nd Pennsylvania ranked No. 3 of 173 regiments reporting loss.
59th New York ranked No. 6 of 173 regiments reporting loss.
7th Michigan ranked No. 8 of 173 regiments reporting loss.
42nd New York ranked No. 18 of 173 regiments reporting loss.
34th New York ranked No. 23 of 173 regiments reporting loss.

While it is usually dangerous to compare casualty figures of different battles, the intensity of Sedgwick's loss was such that several examples are in order. The five divisions of the Federal army which were seriously engaged at South Mountain (Turner's and Fox's Gaps) had a combined loss of 1,813 of whom 325 were killed.[3] The total Federal loss at the Battle of Cedar Mountain was 2,381 with 314 killed.[4] At the Battle of Pea Ridge the total Federal loss was 1,384 with 203 killed.[5] When these figures are compared with Sedgwick's loss of 2,210 with 373 killed it is not hard to see how an experienced fighting man as Sumner could describe Antietam as a "very severe action--uncommonly severe."[6]"

Next, Appendix B: Density of Formation


Notes====

1. O.R. 189-200 (Casualty Report) [Stinson notes in his bibliography that "All references [to the Official Records] are from Volume XIX, Part I unless otherwise cited. "[References] will be cited O.R. followed by the page number and the name of the person who submitted the report, as follows: O.R., 275 [Sumner]."]
2. Thompkins' Battery was posted on the left of Greene's Division and was directly involved in the operations of that unit and French's Division.
3. O.R.,187 (Casualty Report)
4. B&L II, 496 [B&L is R.U. Johnson and C. C. Buell, eds.,Battles and Leaders of the Civil War. 4 vols. (New York: The Century Co., 1884-1888).]
5. B&L I, 337.
6. C.C.W. I, 369 (Sumner) Stinson's C.C.W. abbreviation is to his bibliographic source which is Thirty-eighth Congress, Report of the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War 4 vols. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1865.]

The 1962 Stinson Study: Third Entry

"Uncle" John Sedgwick, Library of Congress

Fifty years ago, National Park Service historian Dwight E. Stinson, Jr. set out to “present a definitive study of the operations of Sedgwick’s Division at the Battle of Antietam.” What follows below is the third entry from his report: Part III: Conduct of Attack and Summation.

Conduct of Attack

Most of the points connected with the conduct of Sedgwick’s attack are obvious in reading the Operations section of this report.[1] The 75 yard interval between the brigade lines was far too close to permit the execution of a movement to cover a flank attack.[2] In addition, the designated order of battle rendered staff work above the regimental level almost impossible, particularly in a wooded area. This is to say that the brigade commanders could not coordinate their units properly because the line of battle was over a quarter of a mile long. This condition was exemplified by the 34th New York becoming separated from its brigade without its commander of Gorman realizing it. When Dana’s Brigade was hit he was forced to remain with the two left regiments thereby leaving the other three without a commander. Almost any formation would have been better than the one used by ideally it should have been with the brigades formed in column of regiments. While these criticisms are valid, it must also be remembered that the dispositions were made under the impression that French’s whole division would be covering the left.

The forward movement was conducted at double time, perhaps to minimize the effect of Confederate artillery fire[3]. But by moving on the double all the difficulties of keeping reign on the already unwieldy battle lines were magnified. Furthermore, a telescopic effect was produced when the first line was brought to an abrupt halt on the farther edge of the woods. The rear lines kept moving forward until they had almost closed up on Gorman.

The total effect was that if the movement had been conducted in maneuvers rather than combat confusion would have resulted the moment the first line was ordered to halt. In other words, the formation was built-in confusion and it remained only for 7,000 Confederates to turn confusion into disaster.

Edwin Vose Sumner, Library of Congress

Summation

1. McClellan’s Responsibility. Although it is often done, McClellan should not be censored for the piecemeal attacks of Sedgwick and French. From the time he released the II Corps the conduct of the operation was in the hands of Sumner both in fact and theory. As Clausewitz has said, the army commander gives the direction of march to his corps commander and points out the enemy as the objective and victory as the goal. McClellan did this and from then on had to rely on Sumner to see that it was done. McClellan’s only tampering with the original order was to withhold Richardson’s Division temporarily and this had no bearing on the results or conduct of the operation.

2. Corps Command. There is little to praise in Sumner’s conduct as commander of the II Corps. Although he did so for what he considered good reason, Sumner separated himself from 2/3 of his corps and acted the part of a division commander. He did not coordinate his two lead divisions properly nor did he even know the whereabouts of one of them when Sedgwick began to give way. This is proved by the following message which was signaled to McClellan during the crisis: ‘Reinforcements are badly wanted. Our troops are giving way. I am hunting for French’s and Slocum’s Divisions. If you know where they are, send them immediately.[4]

Sumner felt that the situation warranted immediate attack. His most serious mistake was not in making the attack, but in not allowing Sedgwick to command it while he (Sumner) remained in the rear to coordinate the corps.

3. Artillery Support. The wooded nature of the terrain and the comparative shortness of the conflict combined to render the artillery to an insignificant role in Sedgwick’s operations. No batteries moved west of the Hagerstown Pike with the divisional advance, in fact Woodruff’s Battery of the division did not come into position south of the Cornfield until the infantry was already falling back.[5] Many Federal batteries contributed to the breakup of the Confederate attempt to pursue Sedgwick but their activities will be the subject of a later study.[6]

4. Result. The II Corps was committed to attack and, if possible, break the confederate left. Two-thirds of it did not even hit the Confederate left and the division that did, suffered a crushing defeat. On the basis of this, the result was a total failure. However, Sedgwick’s defeat was so complete that Sumner was convinced that further attacks in the sector would result in disaster. This undoubtedly saved at least one division of the VI Corps from launching an attack which could gain no decisive result.[7] The operation also resulted in obliging General Lee to commit all of his reserves and to strip his extreme right of a division.[8] This weakened other portions of the Confederate line and eased the task of the IX Corps considerably. 

Next, Appendices

Notes ====

Dwight E. Stinson, Jr. Operations of Sedgwick's Division. Unpublished, National Park Service Report, 1962. This typescript report is at the Antietam National Battlefield Library and Archives. All notes to Stinson's report are enclosed in quotes.

1. The Operations Section of the Stinson Report will be uploaded in a future post.

2. Stinson directs the reader to Appendix B of his report. This will be uploaded in the next few days.

3. Stinson note: “Although descriptions of Sedgwick’s advance to the West Woods are often written to sound as if the division moved at parade cadence, there is ample evidence in the reports of the unit commanders that it was done at double time.”

4. “12 O.R., 134 (Signal Corps Report). There is no time on the message.” Stinson notes in his bibliography that "All references [to the Official Records] are from Volume XIX, Part I unless otherwise cited. "[References] will be cited O.R. followed by the page number and the name of the person who submitted the report, as follows: O.R., 275 [Sumner].”

5. “13 O.R., 309 (Woodruff). Hanson, 50, claims that Woodruff’s Battery was the only one to accompany Sedgwick into the West Woods but there is no evidence to support this.” Stinson’s “Hanson” reference is to Joseph Mills Hanson, A Report on the Employment of the Artillery at the Battle of Antietam, Maryland, With A view to Marking Battery Positions at the Antietam National Battlefield Site. Unpublished. National Park Service Report, 1940.

6. Stinson’s reference to a “later study” on artillery has not been found.

7. “14 B&L, II, 579 (Franklin). This is thoroughly discussed in Sunken Road Report, 34-39.” B&L is R.U. Johnson and C. C. Buell, eds., Battles and Leaders of the Civil War. 4 vols. (New York: The Century Co., 1884-1888); the Sunken Road Report is identified in his bibliography as Dwight E. Stinson, The Attack on the Sunken Road: Operations of Richardson's and French's Divisions. Unpublished, National Park Service Report, 1961.

8. This was John Walker’s Division.