Abstract
Robert E. Lee exploited the geology of central Maryland on the largest scale during the Maryland Campaign and at the Battle of Antietam. In the days preceding the battle, he held the passes through the hard quartzite ridges of South Mountain to delay the Army of the Potomac’s advance towards his isolated Corps. Once McClellan arrived on the carbonate battleground around Sharpsburg, the Federal commander’s offensive tactics proved costly and largely futile. McClellan told each of his six Corps commanders of their specific assignment during the battle, but never the overall battleplan. As a result, the rolling terrain of the limestones, dolostones, and shales on the battlefield prohibited each Corps commander from observing the actions of their colleagues and coordinating and supporting their attacks. As a result, each portion of the battle was a disjointed and unsuccessful attempt to break Lee’s line. The opening morning phase of the battle was fought across the Conococheague Limestone, a rock formation known for consistently weathering and producing undulating terrain. Casualties were especially high during this fighting. The afternoon phase of the battle was concentrated around a Confederate position in the famous sunken lane. Here the Elbrook Formation, composed of alternating beds of limestone, harder dolostone, and softer shale, produced a rolling landscape that the Union officers used for concealment when on the offensive. The final phase of the battle was concentered around the southernmost bridge across Antietam Creek and the contact between the Elbrook and Waynesboro Formations. Burnside’s IX Corps was ordered to attack Lee’s right flank, but delays in capturing and crossing the bridge, and difficulty with the rugged terrain of the Elbrook, cost the Union greatly. The battle ended when A.P. Hill’s Light Division, marching from Harpers Ferry, arrived on the field to deliver the final counter-attack, saving Lee’s army.
“In the open the growing corn was cut from the stalks as with knives, and within the woods limbs of trees were torn away and rocks were splintered by the deadly fire”
—Rev. J. Richards Boyle, Adjutant of the 111th Pennsylvania Regiment, at “Pennsylvania at Antietam Day”, September 17th, 1904
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Lee’s ordering of Pickett’s Charge on July 3 demonstrates the degree of overestimation he had for what his veteran Confederate infantry were capable of accomplishing.
- 2.
Examples of mis-statements such as this are too numerous to list. There are even entire books with misleading titles (e.g. America’s Deadliest Day: The Battle of Antietam, Terri Sievert). Gizmodo.com compiled a list of deaths organized by varying units of time then somehow doubled the number of deaths at Antietam, then listed Sept. 17 as “7200 Deaths, by the Day” (https://io9.gizmodo.com/estimated-deaths-within-estimated-lengths-of-time-1441118361).
- 3.
Unhindered from rifle-fire from the sunken road; Confederate artillery on other portions of the field made the approach highly dangerous.
References
Bailey, R. H. (1984). The Bloodiest Day: The Battle of Antietam (176p). Alexandria: Time-Life Books.
Bassler, R. S. (1919). Cambrian and Ordovician (424p). Baltimore, MD. Maryland Geological Survey Systematic Report.
Brezinski, D. K. (1992). Lithostratigraphy of the western Blue Ridge cover rocks in Maryland: Maryland Geological Survey Reports of Investigation 55, 69p.
Chiles, P. (1998). Artillery hell! The guns of Antietam. Blue and Gray Magazine, XVI, 6–16, 24–25, 41–59.
Cleaves, E. T., Edwards, J., & Glaser, J. D. (1968). Geologic Map of Maryland. Map: Maryland Geological Survey, scale 1:250,000.
Demillo, R. V. (1983). Wavy and lenticular-bedded carbonate ribbon rocks of the Upper Cambrian Conococheague limestone, central Appalachians. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 53(4), 1121–1132.
Edwards, J., Jr. (1978). Geologic Map of Washington County, Maryland. Baltimore: Maryland Geological Survey.
Ehlen, J., & Whisonant, R. C. (2008). Military Geology of Antietam Battlefield, Maryland, USA—Geology, terrain, and casualties. Geology Today, 24(1), 20–27.
Frassanito, W. A. (1978). Antietam: The photographic legacy of America’s Bloodiest Day (304p). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Hess, E. J. (2008). The rifle musket in Civil War combat: Reality and myth (296p). Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.
Hippensteel, S. P. (2016). Carbonate rocks and American Civil War infantry tactics. Geosphere, 12(2), 234–365.
McPherson, J. M. (2002). Crossroads of Freedom: Antietam (224p). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Means, J. (2015). Roadside geology of Maryland, Delaware, and Washington, D.C. (Roadside Geology Series) (346p). Cambridge: Mountain Press.
Nosworthy, B. (2003). The bloody crucible of courage: Fighting methods and combat experience of the Civil War (754p). New York: Caroll and Graf.
Rodes, R. (1887). Official Report included in: The War of the Rebellion: A compilation of the official records of the Union and Confederate Armies, v. XIX, Part I (pp. 1036–1038).
Sears, S. W. (1983). Landscape turned red: The battle of Antietam (431p) New Haven: Ticknor and Fields.
Southworth, C. S., & Brezinski, D. K. (1996). Geology of the Harpers Ferry Quadrangle, Virginia, Maryland, and West Virginia. U. S. Geological Survey Bulletin 2123.
Southworth, S., & Denenny. (2006). Geologic Map of the National Parks in the National Capital Region, Washington, D.C., Virginia, Maryland, and West Virginia. Reston: United States Geological Survey, Open-File Report 2005-1331.
Southworth, S., Brezinski, D. K., Orndorff, R. C., Repetski, J. E., & Denenny D. M. (2008) Geology of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park and Potomac River corridor, District of Columbia, Maryland, West Virginia, and Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper (1691, 144p).
Thompson, D. I. (1887). With burnside at Antietam. In Battles and Leaders of the Civil War, The Century Company (Vol. 2, pp. 661–662).
Zax, D. (2009). Civil War geology. Special report. Retrieved February 21, 2018, from Smithsonian.com, www.smithsonianmag.com/history/civil-war-geology-123489220/
Further Reading
Catton, B. (1960). The American Heritage Picture History of the Civil War (630p). New York: American Heritage Publishing.
Debelius, M. (1996). Illustrated Atlas of the Civil War (320p). Alexandria: Time Life Books.
McPherson, J. M. (1988). Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era (905p). New York: Ballantine Books.
Nosworthy, B. (2003). The bloody crucible of courage: Fighting methods and combat experience of the Civil War (753p). New York: Carroll and Graf Publishers.
Priest, J. M. (1989). Antietam: The soldiers’ battle (394p). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hippensteel, S. (2019). Antietam. In: Rocks and Rifles. Advances in Military Geosciences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00877-2_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00877-2_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-00876-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-00877-2
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)