Crossroads of Freedom: Antietam

The spring of 1862 saw a number of Union victories. The summer saw Confederate successes, and the invasion of Maryland in September. The Union victory drove back the Confederates, prevented foreign recognition of the Confederacy, raised the morale of the Union, and allowed Lincoln to issue the Emancipation Proclamation. More American soldiers died in this one battle than in all other 19th century wars combined! Such slaughter would not be seen again until the Great War.The small rivers in Virginia were a defense line to any advance onto Richmond. McClellan wanted a flank attack from Fort Monroe, using a secure supply line. McClellan moved too slowly, the Confederate army escaped, but Norfolk was captured. The Union army was a few miles from Richmond, and the war seemed likely to end. While the Union Navy could not prevent cotton exports in 1861, the South decided not to export cotton to pressure Great Britain to recognize the Confederacy! The bumper crops of 1859 and 1860 created a surplus and negated this strategy. By 1862 the Union Navy effected the blockade, and this reduced any chance of European recognition. (There is no mention of Union wheat exports.)May 1862 saw TJ Jackson's victory in the Shenandoah valley. J Johnston's attack on McClellan's army resulted in his replacement by Robert E Lee. The book mentions McClellan's reluctance to attack, and Confederate successes. This implies that McClellan's intelligence was faulty, and the Confederates much better. McClellan remained popular with his troops; did they see the big picture? Some army officers thought McClellan should have attacked. Part of this criticism stems from the politics of cliques and rivalries, not just the failure to win or even attack.While the Confederacy was founded to keep slavery, their European sympathizers were against slavery (p.60). Since the Union did not then call for abolition, they also lost support. Lincoln was a pragmatic politician. If keeping slavery saved the Union, he would do it. But if saving the Union meant destroying slavery, he would do that. Lincoln was "naturally anti-slavery", and the South knew it. In July Lincoln told border-state congressmen that if they did not accept compensated emancipation, universal emancipation would follow "a military necessity" )p.70). Public opinion changed since 1861.The Confederate invasion of Maryland was not followed by popular support. Defeat of the Union could turn America into petty republics, as in South America. But the Confederate supply lines were lengthened, and the Union army became more strengthened (p.104). On Sept 13, 1862 Corporal Barton W. Mitchell found an envelope with three cigars. In there was "Special Orders No 191" which told of Lee's plans. This was brought to McCLellan; for once he had the advantage! But Little Mac delayed, and Lee escaped disaster. McClellan failed to use his cavalry to scout the enemy. After Lee withdrew his troops, McClellan, with more fresh troops, failed to pursue (p.130)

Dr. McPherson is unmatched in writing highly readable books which at the same time manifest an unparalleled academic knowledge of Civil War sources. This book reads as well as his Pulitzer prize-winning "Battle Cry of Freedom" (the best one volume history of the Civil War), and simultaneously reflects the highest level of expertise. While other books treat the battle of Antietam itself in far greater detail (e.g., "Landscape Turned Red," by Stephen Sears), no other work goes into such detail on the reaction in Northern, Southern, and European newspapers to the events before and after the battle. The author sets the context for Sharpsburg by reviewing battles leading up to Lee's invasion of the north and the resulting bloodiest day in American history. The politics of the Confederacy's seeking British recognition, the economics of King Cotton, the politics of slavery and auspicious timing of the Emancipation Proclamation, the mid-term election of 1862--this background and aftermath of the battle are analyzed comprehensively with a thoroughness not found elsewhere. I'm not a historian, but a serious buff who has read hundreds of Civil War books. There are only two authors on the recent unpleasantness whose books I haven't been able to put down once opening the cover. One is Bruce Catton, who captured the romanticism of the common soldier; the other is James McPherson, who writes clear, succint prose reflecting the deepest levels of scholarship. After Battle Cry of Freedom, this book is his best work, and is a must for readers who want to understand the social and political context of this most intensely violent of American battles.

What I actually meant to say in the title is that this slim, wonderfully written book is: A cogent, concise military and political history of the Antietam, or Maryland Campaign of September 1862 and its aftermath.To those other reviewers who were upset that this was not an involved battle narrative of Antietam and chose to take issue with Professor McPherson over this, all I can say is: 1.) You've apparently never read James McPherson before, and2.) Even Professor McPherson stated in the introduction that this was NOT a full battle history of Antietam. With the notable exceptions of "Battle Cry of Freedom" and "Lamson of the Gettysburg" Dr. McPherson writes tight, moving, beautifully written book-length essays. "Crossroads of Freedom: Antietam" is no different. He captures the mood of the country, the defeat of Pope at Second Manassas, and Lee's decision to go north, the battle itself, and President Lincoln's decision to go forth with the Emancipation Proclamation as a result of the Union victory. The passages describing the drama at Harpers Ferry when Stonewall Jackson hemmed in the hapless drunk Dixon Miles, and the vacillation of Union commanders, are among the best written on thst prelude to the Antietam battle, and while Professor McPherson may not write a lengthy battle history, he does capture of the drama and pathos of the battle exceptionally well. And as he pointed out, this book was not just a battle narrative, and he recommended that the reader interested in such do read other works including John Priest's "Antietam: The Soldier's Battle"."Crossroads of Freedom: Antietam" is just as solid and just as good as some of his earlier works including "For Cause and Comrades", "What They Fought For", "Images of the Civil War" (with Mort Kunstler), as well as "Battle Cry of Freedom".If I am effusive in my praise for this book, it is only because it is Right, and I am also indebted to Dr. McPherson's encouragement and kindness to me when our book "Civil War: Garments, History, Legends and Lore" was published. Dr. McPherson, thank you, and once again you have come through with a winner!

On September 17, 1862, the Army of the Potomac commanded by General George B. McClellan met the Army of Northern Virgina commanded by Robert E. Lee in the fields near Sharpsburg, Maryland. The result was the Battle of Antietam, the bloodiest day in American History and a pivotal moment of the Civil War. The battle ended the Confederacy's first invasion of the North and gave President Lincoln the opportunity to issue the Emancipation Proclamation.In his short study, "Crossroads of Freedom" Professor McPherson weaves together many strands in discussing the significance of the battle. First, he places the battle against the backdrop of the prior military course of the war, both in the Eastern and the Western Theatres. He points out how Union successes in the early part of 1862 were followed by serious defeats in the Seven Days Battle and Second Manassas with the tide of the war turning to the Confederacy. Although the South would again invade the North culminating in the Battle of Gettysberg, Antietam was a clear check to Southern momentum. It gave the Union the courage, will and political force to fight on. Second, Professor McPherson emphasizes the role of the European powers -- England and France -- in the Civil War. These nations followed events in America closely and were economically at risk from the loss of Southern cotton for their textile mills. They likely would have recognized the Confederacy if the results of the first invasion of the North had favored the Cofederacy. Third, and probably most importantly to his theme, Professor McPherson discusses the role of Antietam in the changing character of the Civil War. President Lincoln was opposed to slavery, but his initial war aims did not include freeing the slaves. Rather he wished to hold the Union together. As the War continued, Lincoln became convinced of the necessity of issuing an Emancipation Procamation but believed that he needed a military success to give the Proclamation force and credibility. The victory at Antietam, narrow as it was, and tremendous as was its human cost, gave him that opportunity.Emancipation was indeed a new birth of freedom. It also, as Professor McPherson points out, changed the character of the War from one with the aim of trying to persuade the South to come back to a state of total War -- which changed the character of a culture and redefined the nature of freedom in the United States.Professor McPherson's book is part of a series called "Pivotal Moments in American History" whose aim is "to encourage interest in problems of historical contingency." There was a great deal of chance involved in the Battle of Antietam, more so than in most military campaigns. (There were also military blunders on both sides.) During the course of the southern invasion the Union discovered by chance a copy of General Lee's "Special Order No. 179" which had been dropped in a field. Special Order No. 179 detalied Lee's disposition of his troops and gave General McC

This is one of the best books I've ever read about the Civil War--it's amazing how much detail and drama McPherson fits into a small number of pages. He really shows why the battle of Antietam was a turning point of the war, not just in military terms but also because of its effect on politics and diplomacy. (Many people don't know it but before Antietam the South came close to being recognized by Britain, which probably would have forced the North to agree to a peace treaty.) The story follows well-known figures like Lincoln, Lee, and McClellan, but also shows us men in the ranks. And the chapters on the fighting itself are as gripping as you'd expect from a Pulitzer Prize-winning author. This is a must-read for anyone interested in Civil War history.