What do you think?
Rate this book
Battle of Antietam: A History From Beginning to End
The Battle of Antietam was a turning point in the Civil War. In the span of several hours, there would be more loss of American life than in any other battle before or since, leaving one in four of the soldiers who took part either dead or wounded by the end of the day.
✓ Maryland, My Maryland…
✓ McClellan’s Army
✓ The Opening Gambit
✓ Harper’s Ferry
✓ Dunker Church & The Woods
✓ The Cornfield
✓ Bloody Lane
And much more!
What led to such a disastrous conclusion? And could something positive come from such an appalling massacre? The focus of the war was about to change. So too was how the American people viewed war as a whole.
✓ Maryland, My Maryland…
✓ McClellan’s Army
✓ The Opening Gambit
✓ Harper’s Ferry
✓ Dunker Church & The Woods
✓ The Cornfield
✓ Bloody Lane
And much more!
What led to such a disastrous conclusion? And could something positive come from such an appalling massacre? The focus of the war was about to change. So too was how the American people viewed war as a whole.
126 pages, Kindle Edition
Published October 31, 2016
172 people are currently reading
242 people want to read
About the author
Hourly History
696 books859 followersAt Hourly History, we focus on publishing history books that are concise, straightforward and take no longer than one hour to read.
Receive our new eBooks for free every Friday.
Sign up at: www.hourlyhistory.com/free
Receive our new eBooks for free every Friday.
Sign up at: www.hourlyhistory.com/free
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
March 14, 2017
On April 12, 1861, when troops under General P.T.G. Beauregard fired on the Federal fort of Ft. Sumter, Americans on both sides of the conflict were sure hostilities would end within the month. This, as history has shown us, was not the case. At First and Second Bull Run, battles fought just over the Potomac River, close to Washington, the Confederate Army was victorious. Afterward, the Union morale was at an all-time low and Confederate spirits were high but their stomachs were empty, uniforms in tatters, and many marched barefoot. When General Robert E. Lee led his Army of Northern Virginia into Maryland in September of 1862, he was seeking comforts and basic necessities for his army. He also hoped to get Major General George B. McClellan’s Army of the Potomac into a pitched battle he felt sure he could win. Another decisive victory could assure the support of Great Britain and France for the C.S.A.
The Battle of Antietam took place on September 17, 1862, along Antietam Creek by the town of Sharpsburg, Maryland. The Union tends to remember their battles by the names of geographical features in the area, and the Confederacy uses the name of the closest town for the same battle. It must also be noted that some historians consider the Battle of Antietam as the first invasive battle by the Confederacy. Technically Maryland wasn’t a Union state but belonged to a group known as the Free States and remained in the Union but with many sympathizing with the South. The battle ended in a stalemate but more Americans died on that fateful day than in any other battle in U.S. history (7,650). The Army of Northern Virginia returned to their side of the battlefront and the Army of the Potomac licked their wounds and prepare for a long war. President Abraham Lincoln had a result favorable enough to issue the Emancipation Proclamation, freeing the Southern slaves.
More Americans died in the Civil War (750,000) than in World War I and World War II combined. This short synopsis of a battle doesn’t relate the horror of war or give an accurate perspective of the entire situation. It does provide enough information to make most readers hungry to learn more. If this is the case, this short history is a resounding success.
The Battle of Antietam took place on September 17, 1862, along Antietam Creek by the town of Sharpsburg, Maryland. The Union tends to remember their battles by the names of geographical features in the area, and the Confederacy uses the name of the closest town for the same battle. It must also be noted that some historians consider the Battle of Antietam as the first invasive battle by the Confederacy. Technically Maryland wasn’t a Union state but belonged to a group known as the Free States and remained in the Union but with many sympathizing with the South. The battle ended in a stalemate but more Americans died on that fateful day than in any other battle in U.S. history (7,650). The Army of Northern Virginia returned to their side of the battlefront and the Army of the Potomac licked their wounds and prepare for a long war. President Abraham Lincoln had a result favorable enough to issue the Emancipation Proclamation, freeing the Southern slaves.
More Americans died in the Civil War (750,000) than in World War I and World War II combined. This short synopsis of a battle doesn’t relate the horror of war or give an accurate perspective of the entire situation. It does provide enough information to make most readers hungry to learn more. If this is the case, this short history is a resounding success.
April 11, 2022
The book must be revised and edited.
(Kindle Ed., locations 473-475)
“Alas I cannot. Words are inadequate to the task. Piles of heads, arms, legs and fragments of other portions of humanity all thrown together promiscuously. It is over now, and we laugh at our fears, that is human, so am I.” —William Relyea, a member of the 16th CT
Other than this one following line the book starts with a simple, easy and thus fine entr'/ intr'o-duct'ion:
(Location 11)
In the fall of 1862, the entire world had its attention on what General Robert E. Lee was doing.
I dun think so: Define "entire."
(Locations 27-28)
It was a good time of year for an invasion. Being late September, a fresh harvest would be coming in. What better plan than to deplete the enemy’s resources rather than your own?
The initial plan was correct for the people of the South.
But the way they conducted their military campaign was pretty amateur and even weird:
(Locations 28-33)
It was a strange invasion. While the troops were starving, the orders were to take nothing...and Lee now was taking them within fifty miles of Washington.
The General wished lol The Confederate forces never touched D.C. during the 4-year war.
The District of Columbia was south of Maryland. It was stuck between Maryland and Virginia, and Richmond was located in Virginia (FYI, Richmond as in the 1862-Battle of Richmond was a city in Kentucky, not the Confederate capital city).
You know how funny the war actually was: Both the capitals, D.C. and Richmond were seriously close from each other, but the fights were often far away from the two cities.
Antietam, the path to D.C. for the Confederate Army, too, was near the Maryland-Pennsylvania border way north of D.C., not to mention that Gettysburg was deep inside Pennsylvania.
The American Civil War was one of the best examples of prolonged-consuming war with unnecessary destructions across many states.
Why wouldn't they c'on-centr'ate their forces to take each other's center in the first place?
(Locations 39-40)
...Maryland farm was quite different from the Southern counterpart. Here there were no slaves working vast plantations. Maryland was made up of family farms, with very few individuals owning slaves at all...
So they were not welcome there like the General expected. A wrong calculation to be the base for a battle strategy... General LEE had already lost the fight when it started.
In my judgment, the General wouldn't even have been remembered as a famous and capable Southern commander if his counterparts of the North hadn't been so surprisingly incompetent.
No wonder Lincoln had to keep replacing them one after another...sigh.
(Locations 44-48)
As tempting a target as Washington might have been, the road between Antietam and the Union capital was choked with wounded Northern soldiers in retreat, and the fortification around Washington was tough. Also, the number of troops stationed there would have been twice the size force that Lee commanded. Also, Lee had to keep in mind that a ship stood on standby to whisk President Lincoln and his Cabinet to safety should a Washington invasion occur. All these factors made Washington a less than desirable choice.
Just like the Japanese and North Koreans' successful takeover of Seoul didn't work after all... Come to think about it the US Navy was right there surrounding the country. One of the biggest reasons the Confederacy was to lose the war was the absence of its navy.
These lines with the good explanation to my initial question give this book more credit.
As a matter of fact I wanted to give the book at least three stars despite the overwhelming number of errors throughout the pages.
(Locations 62-64)
...Marching in rags, dirty, with bare feet and gaunt from hunger, fifteen hundred men deserted the army on the march. Some from the conditions, some from being in the service without any possibility of leave, some because they’d “signed on to defend the Confederacy, not to invade.”
Again, who says General LEE was a good military leader? Who would plunge his men into a war under that condition? No doubt he'd suffer a humiliating defeat at the end.
He wasn't even stocking up supplies for further expansion of the war. His army just didn't have enough support from the beginning and suffered from that all throughout the miserable four years of the war.
(Location 93)
...He had a way about him of making others feel important. For this reason, his men would follow him anywhere.
Smart. The line's talking about General McClellan, and that must have been his only talent as a leader, just like our politicians and their populism lol
(Location 138)
At this point, McClellan was working blind. It was no wonder he was cautious.
Working on careful intelligence gatherings before moving one's troops is the base of the bases in military operation, yet the commander was blind..
(Locations 149-151)
...Sergeant John M. Bloss and Corporal Barton W. Mitchell of company F found three cigars wrapped up in a scrap of paper lying in the grass. That selfsame paper penned only three days previous that gave the entire battle plan of the Confederate army. It was in fact that missing communique from General Robert E. Lee to General Hill.
I don't know what to say...sigh.
(Locations 151-159)
Recognizing that they had something important in their hands, they rushed it to their superiors, who wasted no time in getting this information to General McClellan. The whole thing seemed suspicious and was regarded as a possible trap until the authenticity of the handwriting was able to be verified by a former friend of Lee’s Adjunct General, who had penned the copy. Suddenly all those confusing reports of Lee’s strength and destination that he had been getting made sense to McClellan. Still, McClellan did not move. Had McClellan taken action immediately he would have caught Lee’s forces scattered, and could have easily defeated the entire army. Instead, for whatever reason, he waited. It was six hours before he decided a course of action, and another twelve hours before the Union troops first started to move out from Frederick. This was all the time that General Lee needed.
Yeah, they were both idiots lol Lee...he started the campaign under that circumstances, so he must have been at least over-confident and self-centered or something. He thought he was a sort of chosen one or what?
(Locations 172-181)
Miles sent a plea for assistance to McClellan’s headquarters, stating that the besieged town could hold out for 48 hours, but after that, he would be forced to surrender. McClellan, mistakenly believing that Lee’s major forces were ensconced at Boonsboro, ignored Miles completely...That night, while Miles was still holed up at Harper’s Ferry, and McClellan was sending troops anywhere but there to relieve him...
Sounds like General George McClellan was as incompetent as General LEE Il, the Commandant of Chosun Northern Army in 1587 who also fought stupidly during the upcoming Great East Asian War (1592-1598).
(Locations 426-428)
For the third attempt, Burnside chose the 51st New York and the 51st Pennsylvania, under the command of Colonel Edward Ferrero. Ferrero was an inexperienced commander, and not a particularly able one. Before the war, he was a dancing master at West Point and had used his military and political connections to achieve his rank.
Why was a man like him a Full Colonel in the first place then? What a great system the "proud" democracy really was, ha!
(Locations 437-439)
If McClellan was to press against Lee, he would have to use the bridge, but another issue arose. In their eagerness to take the bridge, no one had considered supplies. The men were nearly out of ammunition and were too exhausted to use what they still had...
So incompetent and unsuitable for his job the General really was.
(Locations 446-447)
Two hundred yards from Sharpsburg, the Union called a halt. Ammunition was almost spent. Here they waited for resupply.
What an unprepared military operation! Washington wasn't even that far away from the battle field, was it? I feel for those under General McClellan; what a pity!
(Locations 465-495)
...considerable fresh troops arrived from Washington. Again, had McClellan ordered an attack at this point, they would have completely wiped Lee’s army out. Instead the day passed uneventfully. That night, the Army of Virginia slipped quietly away. McClellan was overjoyed, as to him, this meant a clear victory for the Union. He chose to not pursue Lee’s battered troops though, with little more than a handful of men and even that was given up quickly. As he had throughout the battle, he still clung to the sincere belief that Lee’s men outnumbered his own. Obviously such a move would be disastrous. Better instead to end the battle here, at Antietam. To him, this was a solid victory, one to be proud of. As McClellan later wrote: I feel some little pride, in having with a beaten and demoralized army defeated Lee so utterly, & saved the North so completely. Well—one of these days will I trust do me justice...Even the Southerners criticized McClellan’s handling of the affair and took it as a good sign that he hadn’t pursued Lee after the battle. As was written in the Dispatch on September 30: If we have been thus badly beaten, why is no use made of the victory? Why has McClellan not crossed the river and destroyed the army of General Lee? Why has the latter been allowed to refresh and recruit as his leisure? The truth is this: The victory, though not so decisive as that at Manassas, was certainly a Confederate victory.
And so the war would last 3 more years with hundreds of thousands of more dead, not to mention those wounded with hardships for the rest of their lives thereafter! God damn it, this man was a mass murderer.
The impact of the battle:
(Locations 477-497)
...for the first time the world was invited to view the carnage. Two days after the battle, Alexander Gardner and his assistant traveled to Antietam and visually recorded what they saw there. These photographs were later used in an exhibition in New York City, allowing the citizens to see, for the first time, what the results of a battle of this nature looked like. The world was shocked and appalled. While morale for the soldiers and the Union as a whole had rebounded with the victory, a growing outrage blossomed that paved the way for Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation, and also for his re-election. World opinion also changed after Antietam. England and France had been thinking about stepping into the war on the side of the South, and had only needed a good excuse to acknowledge the Confederacy as a fledgling country. This defeat decided the matter for them, and when England resolved to not become involved, so too did France...Indeed, the Battle of Antietam might have been called a “draw” more than a victory. Whichever it was, it cannot be argued that this was, in fact, a turning point in the Civil War.
A wrong assessment on the author's part who's supposed to be an expert in the matter: The war began with obvious advantage on the Union side. The industrial Union has much more capability to build industrial weapons, railroads, telegram lines and more and more compared to the agricultural South. Practically the South didn't even have its own Naval Forces.
This battle should have ended the war, so there wouldn't be any more casualties and destructions. General McClellan should have been court-martialed!
(Location 503)
Regardless, for whatever the reason, each General approached the war in the method he thought best.
Then they were unqualified for their jobs and titles.
(Locations 506-512)
The Battle of Antietam brought about significant change on many levels. With the Emancipation Proclamation coming only two weeks later, the entire tenor of the Civil War changed. This point here gave a new direction and a new purpose to the Union, and redefined everything. Could these things have been accomplished without Antietam? This question is a little harder. Had it not been immortalized so graphically for the public to see, had there not been so many people dead, maybe the outrage would not have been enough to make such a sweeping statement in regards to slavery. Perhaps though, it was only a matter of time. Another place, another battle might have done much the same. In the long run, does it matter?
No, it wouldn't matter because the war would be over and the Proclamation would be declared anyway with less meaningless bloodshed and destructions.
Obviously this book is incomplete, and it needs a thorough revision and editing work.
(Locations 177-178)
Back at Harper’s Ferry, the situation was fairly dire. The troops under General Miles were mostly untrained. With the Confederates on the Heights, there would be but little recourse other than to surrender in the morning.
Why suddenly General Miles while he was a Colonel with no way for any promotion just in the previous page? And on the Heights? Why the capital letter? Editing please.
(Location 208)
Although the Union trooped arrived a few hours later...
Correction: ...the Union troops...
(Locations 226-228)
...He and his men took the right flank, though the North Woods...
Correction: ...took the right flank, "through" the North Woods...
(Locations 264-265)
As the North pressed on to Dunker Church, Jackson’s men were shredded, leaving and the front line of the Army of Virginia with a large gaping hole in it...
Correction: ...leaving the front line of the Army of Virginia with a large gaping hole in it...
(Location 271)
The Federals fell back to The Cornfield, losing in moments what took over and hour of bloodshed and hundreds of lives to gain...
What? Seriously, does the publisher not know that it ought to edit the book before publishing it!
(Locations 295-305)
At the center of the line, the 27th Indiana fought the Georgians and North Carolinians from one of Hill’s brigades. The Confederates were using buck and ball, three pieces of shrapnel with the standard ball. This was also rather effective, as for every man killed, eleven more were sure to be wounded. Among those wounded was Corporal Barton Mitchell, who had found Lee’s missing orders wrapped around three cigars. Two more of Hill’s brigades joined the fight. However, as they settled in behind a rock ridge in the East Woods, Captain T. P. Thompson spotted Federals and cried out an alarm. Though his commander tried to quiet that alarm, the damage was done. Panic flew through the regiment, and then through the brigade. In moments, the entire brigade was in mass retreat. This opened a gap in the Confederate line. The Northern troops, under the command of Brigadier General George Greene, poured through the opening.
I don't see it; something's missing here. What was wrong for the Capt. to cry out an alarm to warn the brigade? And a Captain is a commander himself. The author must not have had any military experience. He had been dealing with Generals and Colonels as if they were normal ranking Officers in the field, so a Captain must have sounded like a junior Officer to him like a 2nd Lieutenant or Ensign. As a matter of fact there is a huge gap between a Captain (Navy [Full] Lieutenant) and a 2nd Lieutenant (Navy Ensign).
(Location 312)
...With Hooker out of action, there was no commander with authority enough to gather the men...
Correction: ...enough authority...
(Locations 357-358)
...Kimball had his adjunct, a Lieutenant Frederick Hitchcock, order their commander, Colonel Oliver Palmer, to get the men moving...
Correction: Either "...a Lieutenant, Frederick Hitchcock..." or "...Lieutenant Frederick Hitchcock..."
(Location 371)
...He was still giving orders with another musket ball tore into his face...
...with a bullet "tore into" his face? Not torn into? Just "shot in" is better. And why is it suddenly a "musket" ball, not rifle ball? They had been using rifles since the early-19th century, although those rifles were still the old mouth-reloaded types.
(Location 395)
...After today it would become known as Burnside’s Bridge.
Correction: ...After the day...
(Locations 400-408)
...That morning he moved his 11,000 men and 50 cannon to the hills east of the bridge and waited. But McClellan had intended for Burnside to create a diversion...Thus the IX Corps effectively had two commanders. Burnside’s decision left Cox in a difficult place. Both Cox and Burnside knew that marching 1,100 men across a 12-foot bridge under enemy fire would be impractical at best...Toombs had 550 men against Burnside’s 1,100, but Toombs had an enormous advantage.
11,000 or 1,100? A Corps is supposed to be over-10,000 strength, but Toombs had 550...
I'm lost again:
(Locations 420-421)
Downstream, Brigadier General Isaac Rodman found that the crossing McClellan’s engineers had recommended had banks so steep as to make it unusable...
Wow:
(Locations 423-426)
McClellan was growing exasperated. He sent five messengers to Burnside with the same orders: “Take the bridge.” One dispatch said, “even if it takes 10,000 men, he must go now.” Burnside was getting angrier as well, telling McClellan’s Inspector General, “McClellan seems to think I am not trying my best to carry this bridge.”
"...to carry this bridge? Does it make sense? Ain't that supposed to be either "...to carry out this mission (or his order)" or "...take this bridge?"
(Locations 441-442)
...Hill’s men, after two days of grabbing Northern, stores would be well rested and well fed...
I can't give it more than two stars!
The campaign of error goes on till the very last page of the book:
(Locations 462-463)
It was during this part of the battle that night fell...
Ain't that supposed to be like: “It was during this part of the battle when the night fell...”
(Location 498)
...The mistakes made were many...
Many mistakes were made...geez, I feel like I'm reading my father's writing, and my dad doesn't even really speak English lol
(Location 512)
To the men who fought at Antietam, their world changed one September day in 1862...
...on one September day...sigh. Their world didn't change the day, did it?
There are more errors like missing periods, capital letters or weird phrases.
This cannot be a book on the market. Please, revise the work if you haven’t done it yet.
(Kindle Ed., locations 473-475)
“Alas I cannot. Words are inadequate to the task. Piles of heads, arms, legs and fragments of other portions of humanity all thrown together promiscuously. It is over now, and we laugh at our fears, that is human, so am I.” —William Relyea, a member of the 16th CT
Other than this one following line the book starts with a simple, easy and thus fine entr'/ intr'o-duct'ion:
(Location 11)
In the fall of 1862, the entire world had its attention on what General Robert E. Lee was doing.
I dun think so: Define "entire."
(Locations 27-28)
It was a good time of year for an invasion. Being late September, a fresh harvest would be coming in. What better plan than to deplete the enemy’s resources rather than your own?
The initial plan was correct for the people of the South.
But the way they conducted their military campaign was pretty amateur and even weird:
(Locations 28-33)
It was a strange invasion. While the troops were starving, the orders were to take nothing...and Lee now was taking them within fifty miles of Washington.
The General wished lol The Confederate forces never touched D.C. during the 4-year war.
The District of Columbia was south of Maryland. It was stuck between Maryland and Virginia, and Richmond was located in Virginia (FYI, Richmond as in the 1862-Battle of Richmond was a city in Kentucky, not the Confederate capital city).
You know how funny the war actually was: Both the capitals, D.C. and Richmond were seriously close from each other, but the fights were often far away from the two cities.
Antietam, the path to D.C. for the Confederate Army, too, was near the Maryland-Pennsylvania border way north of D.C., not to mention that Gettysburg was deep inside Pennsylvania.
The American Civil War was one of the best examples of prolonged-consuming war with unnecessary destructions across many states.
Why wouldn't they c'on-centr'ate their forces to take each other's center in the first place?
(Locations 39-40)
...Maryland farm was quite different from the Southern counterpart. Here there were no slaves working vast plantations. Maryland was made up of family farms, with very few individuals owning slaves at all...
So they were not welcome there like the General expected. A wrong calculation to be the base for a battle strategy... General LEE had already lost the fight when it started.
In my judgment, the General wouldn't even have been remembered as a famous and capable Southern commander if his counterparts of the North hadn't been so surprisingly incompetent.
No wonder Lincoln had to keep replacing them one after another...sigh.
(Locations 44-48)
As tempting a target as Washington might have been, the road between Antietam and the Union capital was choked with wounded Northern soldiers in retreat, and the fortification around Washington was tough. Also, the number of troops stationed there would have been twice the size force that Lee commanded. Also, Lee had to keep in mind that a ship stood on standby to whisk President Lincoln and his Cabinet to safety should a Washington invasion occur. All these factors made Washington a less than desirable choice.
Just like the Japanese and North Koreans' successful takeover of Seoul didn't work after all... Come to think about it the US Navy was right there surrounding the country. One of the biggest reasons the Confederacy was to lose the war was the absence of its navy.
These lines with the good explanation to my initial question give this book more credit.
As a matter of fact I wanted to give the book at least three stars despite the overwhelming number of errors throughout the pages.
(Locations 62-64)
...Marching in rags, dirty, with bare feet and gaunt from hunger, fifteen hundred men deserted the army on the march. Some from the conditions, some from being in the service without any possibility of leave, some because they’d “signed on to defend the Confederacy, not to invade.”
Again, who says General LEE was a good military leader? Who would plunge his men into a war under that condition? No doubt he'd suffer a humiliating defeat at the end.
He wasn't even stocking up supplies for further expansion of the war. His army just didn't have enough support from the beginning and suffered from that all throughout the miserable four years of the war.
(Location 93)
...He had a way about him of making others feel important. For this reason, his men would follow him anywhere.
Smart. The line's talking about General McClellan, and that must have been his only talent as a leader, just like our politicians and their populism lol
(Location 138)
At this point, McClellan was working blind. It was no wonder he was cautious.
Working on careful intelligence gatherings before moving one's troops is the base of the bases in military operation, yet the commander was blind..
(Locations 149-151)
...Sergeant John M. Bloss and Corporal Barton W. Mitchell of company F found three cigars wrapped up in a scrap of paper lying in the grass. That selfsame paper penned only three days previous that gave the entire battle plan of the Confederate army. It was in fact that missing communique from General Robert E. Lee to General Hill.
I don't know what to say...sigh.
(Locations 151-159)
Recognizing that they had something important in their hands, they rushed it to their superiors, who wasted no time in getting this information to General McClellan. The whole thing seemed suspicious and was regarded as a possible trap until the authenticity of the handwriting was able to be verified by a former friend of Lee’s Adjunct General, who had penned the copy. Suddenly all those confusing reports of Lee’s strength and destination that he had been getting made sense to McClellan. Still, McClellan did not move. Had McClellan taken action immediately he would have caught Lee’s forces scattered, and could have easily defeated the entire army. Instead, for whatever reason, he waited. It was six hours before he decided a course of action, and another twelve hours before the Union troops first started to move out from Frederick. This was all the time that General Lee needed.
Yeah, they were both idiots lol Lee...he started the campaign under that circumstances, so he must have been at least over-confident and self-centered or something. He thought he was a sort of chosen one or what?
(Locations 172-181)
Miles sent a plea for assistance to McClellan’s headquarters, stating that the besieged town could hold out for 48 hours, but after that, he would be forced to surrender. McClellan, mistakenly believing that Lee’s major forces were ensconced at Boonsboro, ignored Miles completely...That night, while Miles was still holed up at Harper’s Ferry, and McClellan was sending troops anywhere but there to relieve him...
Sounds like General George McClellan was as incompetent as General LEE Il, the Commandant of Chosun Northern Army in 1587 who also fought stupidly during the upcoming Great East Asian War (1592-1598).
(Locations 426-428)
For the third attempt, Burnside chose the 51st New York and the 51st Pennsylvania, under the command of Colonel Edward Ferrero. Ferrero was an inexperienced commander, and not a particularly able one. Before the war, he was a dancing master at West Point and had used his military and political connections to achieve his rank.
Why was a man like him a Full Colonel in the first place then? What a great system the "proud" democracy really was, ha!
(Locations 437-439)
If McClellan was to press against Lee, he would have to use the bridge, but another issue arose. In their eagerness to take the bridge, no one had considered supplies. The men were nearly out of ammunition and were too exhausted to use what they still had...
So incompetent and unsuitable for his job the General really was.
(Locations 446-447)
Two hundred yards from Sharpsburg, the Union called a halt. Ammunition was almost spent. Here they waited for resupply.
What an unprepared military operation! Washington wasn't even that far away from the battle field, was it? I feel for those under General McClellan; what a pity!
(Locations 465-495)
...considerable fresh troops arrived from Washington. Again, had McClellan ordered an attack at this point, they would have completely wiped Lee’s army out. Instead the day passed uneventfully. That night, the Army of Virginia slipped quietly away. McClellan was overjoyed, as to him, this meant a clear victory for the Union. He chose to not pursue Lee’s battered troops though, with little more than a handful of men and even that was given up quickly. As he had throughout the battle, he still clung to the sincere belief that Lee’s men outnumbered his own. Obviously such a move would be disastrous. Better instead to end the battle here, at Antietam. To him, this was a solid victory, one to be proud of. As McClellan later wrote: I feel some little pride, in having with a beaten and demoralized army defeated Lee so utterly, & saved the North so completely. Well—one of these days will I trust do me justice...Even the Southerners criticized McClellan’s handling of the affair and took it as a good sign that he hadn’t pursued Lee after the battle. As was written in the Dispatch on September 30: If we have been thus badly beaten, why is no use made of the victory? Why has McClellan not crossed the river and destroyed the army of General Lee? Why has the latter been allowed to refresh and recruit as his leisure? The truth is this: The victory, though not so decisive as that at Manassas, was certainly a Confederate victory.
And so the war would last 3 more years with hundreds of thousands of more dead, not to mention those wounded with hardships for the rest of their lives thereafter! God damn it, this man was a mass murderer.
The impact of the battle:
(Locations 477-497)
...for the first time the world was invited to view the carnage. Two days after the battle, Alexander Gardner and his assistant traveled to Antietam and visually recorded what they saw there. These photographs were later used in an exhibition in New York City, allowing the citizens to see, for the first time, what the results of a battle of this nature looked like. The world was shocked and appalled. While morale for the soldiers and the Union as a whole had rebounded with the victory, a growing outrage blossomed that paved the way for Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation, and also for his re-election. World opinion also changed after Antietam. England and France had been thinking about stepping into the war on the side of the South, and had only needed a good excuse to acknowledge the Confederacy as a fledgling country. This defeat decided the matter for them, and when England resolved to not become involved, so too did France...Indeed, the Battle of Antietam might have been called a “draw” more than a victory. Whichever it was, it cannot be argued that this was, in fact, a turning point in the Civil War.
A wrong assessment on the author's part who's supposed to be an expert in the matter: The war began with obvious advantage on the Union side. The industrial Union has much more capability to build industrial weapons, railroads, telegram lines and more and more compared to the agricultural South. Practically the South didn't even have its own Naval Forces.
This battle should have ended the war, so there wouldn't be any more casualties and destructions. General McClellan should have been court-martialed!
(Location 503)
Regardless, for whatever the reason, each General approached the war in the method he thought best.
Then they were unqualified for their jobs and titles.
(Locations 506-512)
The Battle of Antietam brought about significant change on many levels. With the Emancipation Proclamation coming only two weeks later, the entire tenor of the Civil War changed. This point here gave a new direction and a new purpose to the Union, and redefined everything. Could these things have been accomplished without Antietam? This question is a little harder. Had it not been immortalized so graphically for the public to see, had there not been so many people dead, maybe the outrage would not have been enough to make such a sweeping statement in regards to slavery. Perhaps though, it was only a matter of time. Another place, another battle might have done much the same. In the long run, does it matter?
No, it wouldn't matter because the war would be over and the Proclamation would be declared anyway with less meaningless bloodshed and destructions.
Obviously this book is incomplete, and it needs a thorough revision and editing work.
(Locations 177-178)
Back at Harper’s Ferry, the situation was fairly dire. The troops under General Miles were mostly untrained. With the Confederates on the Heights, there would be but little recourse other than to surrender in the morning.
Why suddenly General Miles while he was a Colonel with no way for any promotion just in the previous page? And on the Heights? Why the capital letter? Editing please.
(Location 208)
Although the Union trooped arrived a few hours later...
Correction: ...the Union troops...
(Locations 226-228)
...He and his men took the right flank, though the North Woods...
Correction: ...took the right flank, "through" the North Woods...
(Locations 264-265)
As the North pressed on to Dunker Church, Jackson’s men were shredded, leaving and the front line of the Army of Virginia with a large gaping hole in it...
Correction: ...leaving the front line of the Army of Virginia with a large gaping hole in it...
(Location 271)
The Federals fell back to The Cornfield, losing in moments what took over and hour of bloodshed and hundreds of lives to gain...
What? Seriously, does the publisher not know that it ought to edit the book before publishing it!
(Locations 295-305)
At the center of the line, the 27th Indiana fought the Georgians and North Carolinians from one of Hill’s brigades. The Confederates were using buck and ball, three pieces of shrapnel with the standard ball. This was also rather effective, as for every man killed, eleven more were sure to be wounded. Among those wounded was Corporal Barton Mitchell, who had found Lee’s missing orders wrapped around three cigars. Two more of Hill’s brigades joined the fight. However, as they settled in behind a rock ridge in the East Woods, Captain T. P. Thompson spotted Federals and cried out an alarm. Though his commander tried to quiet that alarm, the damage was done. Panic flew through the regiment, and then through the brigade. In moments, the entire brigade was in mass retreat. This opened a gap in the Confederate line. The Northern troops, under the command of Brigadier General George Greene, poured through the opening.
I don't see it; something's missing here. What was wrong for the Capt. to cry out an alarm to warn the brigade? And a Captain is a commander himself. The author must not have had any military experience. He had been dealing with Generals and Colonels as if they were normal ranking Officers in the field, so a Captain must have sounded like a junior Officer to him like a 2nd Lieutenant or Ensign. As a matter of fact there is a huge gap between a Captain (Navy [Full] Lieutenant) and a 2nd Lieutenant (Navy Ensign).
(Location 312)
...With Hooker out of action, there was no commander with authority enough to gather the men...
Correction: ...enough authority...
(Locations 357-358)
...Kimball had his adjunct, a Lieutenant Frederick Hitchcock, order their commander, Colonel Oliver Palmer, to get the men moving...
Correction: Either "...a Lieutenant, Frederick Hitchcock..." or "...Lieutenant Frederick Hitchcock..."
(Location 371)
...He was still giving orders with another musket ball tore into his face...
...with a bullet "tore into" his face? Not torn into? Just "shot in" is better. And why is it suddenly a "musket" ball, not rifle ball? They had been using rifles since the early-19th century, although those rifles were still the old mouth-reloaded types.
(Location 395)
...After today it would become known as Burnside’s Bridge.
Correction: ...After the day...
(Locations 400-408)
...That morning he moved his 11,000 men and 50 cannon to the hills east of the bridge and waited. But McClellan had intended for Burnside to create a diversion...Thus the IX Corps effectively had two commanders. Burnside’s decision left Cox in a difficult place. Both Cox and Burnside knew that marching 1,100 men across a 12-foot bridge under enemy fire would be impractical at best...Toombs had 550 men against Burnside’s 1,100, but Toombs had an enormous advantage.
11,000 or 1,100? A Corps is supposed to be over-10,000 strength, but Toombs had 550...
I'm lost again:
(Locations 420-421)
Downstream, Brigadier General Isaac Rodman found that the crossing McClellan’s engineers had recommended had banks so steep as to make it unusable...
Wow:
(Locations 423-426)
McClellan was growing exasperated. He sent five messengers to Burnside with the same orders: “Take the bridge.” One dispatch said, “even if it takes 10,000 men, he must go now.” Burnside was getting angrier as well, telling McClellan’s Inspector General, “McClellan seems to think I am not trying my best to carry this bridge.”
"...to carry this bridge? Does it make sense? Ain't that supposed to be either "...to carry out this mission (or his order)" or "...take this bridge?"
(Locations 441-442)
...Hill’s men, after two days of grabbing Northern, stores would be well rested and well fed...
I can't give it more than two stars!
The campaign of error goes on till the very last page of the book:
(Locations 462-463)
It was during this part of the battle that night fell...
Ain't that supposed to be like: “It was during this part of the battle when the night fell...”
(Location 498)
...The mistakes made were many...
Many mistakes were made...geez, I feel like I'm reading my father's writing, and my dad doesn't even really speak English lol
(Location 512)
To the men who fought at Antietam, their world changed one September day in 1862...
...on one September day...sigh. Their world didn't change the day, did it?
There are more errors like missing periods, capital letters or weird phrases.
This cannot be a book on the market. Please, revise the work if you haven’t done it yet.
May 9, 2021
Careless
Full of sloppy errors, grammatical mistakes, etc., should have been more carefully edited. Perhaps it was hastily written, who knows?
Full of sloppy errors, grammatical mistakes, etc., should have been more carefully edited. Perhaps it was hastily written, who knows?
March 27, 2021
Battle of Antietam was a part of the American civil war, fought between General Lee, commander of the confederacy, and General McClellan, leader of the union. It was a turning point in the war, along with the lives of the South American slaves. Also, because of this battle, England and France stepped out of the war. Hourly History provides the details of the whole battle.
However, this book was a bit confusing. First, you need to know about the civil war. Also, I couldn't quite understand which General of the war supported which side, as there were many such leaders. I couldn't even understand if General Lee was from the Confederacy or the Union. I had to read the book really slow to understand. So this book might be a bit confusing for fast readers.
However, this book was a bit confusing. First, you need to know about the civil war. Also, I couldn't quite understand which General of the war supported which side, as there were many such leaders. I couldn't even understand if General Lee was from the Confederacy or the Union. I had to read the book really slow to understand. So this book might be a bit confusing for fast readers.
April 1, 2018
Thoughts on this book.
This book realyy highlighted the difficulty of the Union's leadership of it's generals and the poor training of many of its troops at this battle. If not for the veteran troops and it's company grade officers, I feel it could have been a disaster for the North. Luckily Lee also made some blunders, and although this war would go on for several more years, it did allow the final victory that reunited this country of ours.
This book realyy highlighted the difficulty of the Union's leadership of it's generals and the poor training of many of its troops at this battle. If not for the veteran troops and it's company grade officers, I feel it could have been a disaster for the North. Luckily Lee also made some blunders, and although this war would go on for several more years, it did allow the final victory that reunited this country of ours.
April 30, 2021
Battle of Antietam: A Change of Direction
A good account of the battle that would change the course of a young country. This read offers great reference and information about the battle, the men who fought in it and the men that lead them. I just wished there was more time provided for more in-depth knowledge of the facts, strategies and what if's of this pivotal battle of the U.S. Civil War.
A good account of the battle that would change the course of a young country. This read offers great reference and information about the battle, the men who fought in it and the men that lead them. I just wished there was more time provided for more in-depth knowledge of the facts, strategies and what if's of this pivotal battle of the U.S. Civil War.
October 10, 2018
Well done
A well researched and written book about the battle of Antietam. While the book looks at the major events and moments in the battle it is not a concise and thorough telling of the events. For those looking for an understanding of the main events of the battle this book will serve you well.
A well researched and written book about the battle of Antietam. While the book looks at the major events and moments in the battle it is not a concise and thorough telling of the events. For those looking for an understanding of the main events of the battle this book will serve you well.
May 19, 2019
Battle of Antietam
Read Battle of Antietam, as I am getting into the American civil war era. Have always like history, and the history of the Native American Subjecation. Although this is not about the Native American, it is about the is army who fought against them. Would recommend this book.
Read Battle of Antietam, as I am getting into the American civil war era. Have always like history, and the history of the Native American Subjecation. Although this is not about the Native American, it is about the is army who fought against them. Would recommend this book.
June 5, 2019
Well written and informative.
I've always had such a love for history. While reading about the happy and positive moments is important... I also believe it to be just as important to remember the horrors as well. Antietam was a defining moment in the Civil War. Thank you for not skimming over the facts and presenting the reader with the realities of what those soldiers faced.
I've always had such a love for history. While reading about the happy and positive moments is important... I also believe it to be just as important to remember the horrors as well. Antietam was a defining moment in the Civil War. Thank you for not skimming over the facts and presenting the reader with the realities of what those soldiers faced.
June 20, 2019
Good Coverage
The book offers a good, basic, coverage of the battle of Antietam. The battle was a watershed in terms of both influence at the national level and in terms of casualties. It also demonstrated the limitations of the Union commanders in taking initiative and understanding the deep battle. A good overview.
The book offers a good, basic, coverage of the battle of Antietam. The battle was a watershed in terms of both influence at the national level and in terms of casualties. It also demonstrated the limitations of the Union commanders in taking initiative and understanding the deep battle. A good overview.
January 20, 2021
McClellan Could Have Destroyed Lee’s Army But Didn’t
If McClellan had acted decisively in using Lee’s Lost Battle Plans, he could have destroyed the Army of Northern Virginia and possibly ended the war. Failing that, he still had the chance to chase and destroy Lee’s Army as they retreated to Virginia. It would take another two and a half years to end the war.
If McClellan had acted decisively in using Lee’s Lost Battle Plans, he could have destroyed the Army of Northern Virginia and possibly ended the war. Failing that, he still had the chance to chase and destroy Lee’s Army as they retreated to Virginia. It would take another two and a half years to end the war.
October 25, 2018
Very good read about every bad two days in the history of USA.
Very well written. Worth your while no matter your feelings about this piece of American history. Recommend the book. Well written, and easy to read.
Very well written. Worth your while no matter your feelings about this piece of American history. Recommend the book. Well written, and easy to read.
June 22, 2020
This book of the battle of Antietam , which I have knowledge of but had never read any books about.
The reason I have the two stars is that the book didn't give me enough information to get me a total view point of the total battle.
The reason I have the two stars is that the book didn't give me enough information to get me a total view point of the total battle.
January 18, 2021
Good rendition of events leading up to and during the battle. Would have been easier to follow had author/publisher included maps of the key scenes - rather than relying on written description of the military moves & tactics.
November 3, 2024
A Bloody Day
To read about what happened at Antietam is gut wrenching. This battle was the first time the people truly was what was was like. This short book does a good job of conveying the story of that tragic day. This is one any reader on The Civil War should read.
To read about what happened at Antietam is gut wrenching. This battle was the first time the people truly was what was was like. This short book does a good job of conveying the story of that tragic day. This is one any reader on The Civil War should read.
April 30, 2018
Short read
Surprisingly short. Not as much detail A expected. Gives a quick look at one of pivotal battles of second war for ibdependence
Surprisingly short. Not as much detail A expected. Gives a quick look at one of pivotal battles of second war for ibdependence
June 12, 2018
Conveys a convincing picture of the horror and waste of war.
June 19, 2020
A good review.
June 11, 2021
A fairly thorough depiction of one of the bloodiest battles of the Civil War.
June 29, 2021
This was a confusing book because this was a confusing battle. Still, nicely focused.
April 19, 2017
Really good book i loved it so much
It was a really good book and was more better than any history war books I ever read I recommend for people who are interested in wars
It was a really good book and was more better than any history war books I ever read I recommend for people who are interested in wars
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews