Decisions at Antietam: The Fourteen Critical Decisions That Defined the Battle: Command Decisions in America’s Civil War
Autor Michael S. Langen Limba Engleză Paperback – 23 mar 2021
Decisions at Antietamintroduces readers to critical decisions made by Confederate and Union commanders throughout the battle. Michael S. Lang examines the decisions that prefigured the action and shaped the contest as it unfolded. Rather than a linear history of the battle, Lang’s discussion of the critical decisions presents readers with a vivid blueprint of the battle’s developments. Exploring the critical decisions in this way allows the reader to progress from a sense of what happened in these battles to why they happened as they did
Complete with maps and a guided tour,Decisions at Antietamis an indispensable primer, and readers looking for a concise introduction to the battle can tour this sacred ground—or read about it at their leisure—with key insights into the battle and a deeper understanding of the Civil War itself.
Decisions at Antietamis the ninth in a series of books that will explore the critical decisions of major campaigns and battles of the Civil War.
Din seria Command Decisions in America’s Civil War
-
Preț: 135.90 lei -
Preț: 130.71 lei -
Preț: 132.81 lei -
Preț: 130.71 lei -
Preț: 134.86 lei -
Preț: 143.08 lei -
Preț: 128.67 lei -
Preț: 129.68 lei -
Preț: 135.90 lei -
Preț: 132.81 lei -
Preț: 131.75 lei -
Preț: 131.53 lei -
Preț: 132.81 lei -
Preț: 138.99 lei -
Preț: 129.90 lei -
Preț: 138.14 lei -
Preț: 140.00 lei -
Preț: 132.81 lei -
Preț: 133.85 lei
Preț: 140.00 lei
Nou
Puncte Express: 210
Preț estimativ în valută:
26.79€ • 28.03$ • 22.25£
26.79€ • 28.03$ • 22.25£
Carte disponibilă
Livrare economică 12-26 martie
Preluare comenzi: 021 569.72.76
Specificații
ISBN-13: 9781621906148
ISBN-10: 1621906140
Pagini: 277
Greutate: 0.48 kg
Ediția:1st Edition
Editura: University of Tennessee Press
Colecția Univ Tennessee Press
Seria Command Decisions in America’s Civil War
ISBN-10: 1621906140
Pagini: 277
Greutate: 0.48 kg
Ediția:1st Edition
Editura: University of Tennessee Press
Colecția Univ Tennessee Press
Seria Command Decisions in America’s Civil War
Notă biografică
For
35
years,
MICHAEL
S.
LANG
has
worked
as
manager
for
FedEx,
while
also
becoming
a
successful
photographer.
Extras
As
is
the
case
with
the
other
volumes
in
the
Command
Decisions
of
the
American
Civil
War
series,Decisions
at
Antietamapplies
critical
decision
methodology.
This
methodology
asserts
that
as
we
study
the
course
that
a
particular
campaign
or
battle
took,
we
need
to
ask,
“Why
did
these
events
happen
the
way
they
did?”
We
often
believe
that
history
is
a
series
of
random
events
all
mixed
together
to
make
up
the
past.
As
a
matter
of
fact,
history
is
almost
always
determined
by
human
beings’
conscious
and
deliberate
decisions.
The
Battle
of
Antietam
is
a
perfect
example
of
this
phenomenon.
A study of the critical decisions requires us to look at a particular series of events and then contemplate why they happened or what caused them to happen. We also have to ask, “What might have changed had this decision not been made in favor of another?” When this critical decision concept is understood, it can be applied to any battle in any war.
During the course of any historical event as complicated as the Battle of Antietam, actors on both sides of the conflict made thousands if not tens of thousands of decisions. Most of these are typical of any battle. While many of these choices can be considered significant, only a handful of them are considered critical. Critical decisions are not only momentous in their own right but also so important that they substantially shape the decisions and events that follow, thus forming the course of history. These criteria essentially define the characteristics of a critical decision. Simply stated, the study of critical decisions examines the why of a historical event as opposed to the what.
Studying these critical decisions quickly reveals that they are reached at every level of the military. Critical decisions can be strategic, operational, tactical, organizational, personnel related, or logistical.
In concentrating on the critical decisions, I lay out some basic facts to present a relatively clear outline of a very complex event. Where relevant, I include pertinent details, biographical and topographical information, and the situational narrative to provide the reader with an overview of why events developed as they did. I then outline the various options the decision-maker had before him, and what decision he ultimately made. Then the results and impact of the decision are examined along with what might have happened had an alternative decision been made in favor of the actual decision.
Judgments as to what constitutes a critical decision may differ, and many readers’ opinions will no doubt diverge from my own. The critical decision analysis is by its very nature somewhat subjective. For example, cases like the struggle for the West Woods or the Sunken Road involved many decisions, but the nature of the fighting makes precise analysis difficult.
This work assumes the reader has some basic knowledge of the battle, and understanding this fact is essential. This book is not intended to be a complete retelling or reinterpretation of the Battle of Antietam. I only briefly reference the very complicated and relevant political aspects adjacent to the 1862 Maryland Campaign, and I touch on but a few material points of the overall narrative. Any number of excellent books provide a more detailed analysis of those aspects of the campaign as a whole. They are not listed here, so the reader should refer to the bibliography as a guide for preliminary study. This book covers just those events and details relevant to the various decisions discussed. This work, by design, begins its main narrative on September 15, 1862. This is not a dismissal of the relevant events at South Mountain and Harpers Ferry that preceded this date, but a deliberate effort to keep this book at a reasonable length. A future volume will speak to the complex events that took place during the campaign as a whole and the critical decisions that brought both armies to the banks of the Antietam Creek.
As you read, you will notice that the Union and Confederacy used similar but often differing methods to identify units. Both sides identified units at the company, battalion, and regimental level in the same manner. Companies were distinguished by a letter—e.g., A Company, B Company, and so on. Regiments and battalions were usually designated by a number—e.g., Fifth (or 5th) Texas, Nineteenth (or 19th) Indiana. Above the regimental level, the Union and Confederacy took different approaches to identifying individual units.
The official designations of Union brigades, divisions, and corps were numeric and began with a capital letter. Examples include First Brigade, Second Division, Right Wing, Brig. Gen. James Nagle’s First Brigade, Maj. Gen. Israel B. Richardson’s First Division, Maj. Gen. Joseph Hooker’s First Corps, and Maj. Gen. Ambrose Burnside’s Right Wing. When referring to a brigade or division belonging to or commanded by an individual, lowercase letters are used. Examples include, Crawford’s brigade, Sedgwick’s division, Mansfield’s corps, and so on.
Early in the war, the Confederacy simultaneously used both numbering and naming systems for unit designations. The numbering system was used far less often than the naming system as the war progressed. Confederate brigades, divisions, and commands/corps were officially designated by the commanders’ last names followed by Brigade, Division, Command, or Corps. Examples include Hood’s Brigade, Anderson’s Division, and Jackson’s Command. Identification can also be problematic because multiple generals and colonels named Anderson, Hill, and Jones led units in the Army of Northern Virginia at that time.
The Confederate Congress did not authorize the designation of corps until September 18, 1862. Subsequently, Robert E. Lee did not organize his army into corps until November 6, 1862. Longstreet and Jackson unofficially had “commands” during the battle. However, after-action reports and various manuscripts alternately refer to these commands as corps and/or wings.
The Confederate system of unit designation can often be confusing. For example, Col. Vannoy H. Manning led the unit officially named Walker’s Brigade at Antietam. Manning’s brigade was in Walker’s Division at Antietam and commanded by Brig. Gen. John J. Walker. Walker had commanded the aforementioned brigade until June 1862. Therefore, Walker’s Brigade was part of Walker’s Division, with only the latter commanded by Walker himself. If that was not confusing enough, Col. James A. Walker commanded Trimble’s Brigade of Lawton’s Division at Antietam.
As is the case with many Civil War battles, Antietam has more than one name. In the South, the battle was called the Battle of Sharpsburg, and in the North, it was called the Battle of Antietam. Southerners tended to name engagements for the closest town, while Northerners tended to name them for the closest body of water. There were exceptions to this rule as well. The National Park Service officially named the battlefield Antietam, its present designation. To avoid identifying every battle twice in this book, I am sticking with the Northern naming convention going forward.
Determining the specific facts and events that occurred during the Civil War can be extremely problematic. As a result, understanding the precise number of combatants on each side of the conflict becomes a very circular discussion with no clear answer. To further complicate this situation, new research contradicting earlier assertions seems to be published every day. Additionally, as many students of the war understand, exact and standard timekeeping was not generally practiced in the nineteenth century. Readers should therefore add or subtract an hour from every time stated and increase or decrease every head count by 15 percent. Appendix 4 of this manuscript contains additional details on the two armies’ strengths and casualties.
A complete and thorough grasp of mid-nineteenth-century warfare often requires a study of the ground where these events took place. Topography plays a critical role in comprehension of a decision or event. Knowing what a decision-maker saw can often provide valuable insight that is otherwise obscured. Walking the battlefield of Antietam perfectly illustrates this fact. To better facilitate such understanding, I have included a battlefield guide (appendix 1) with tour stops that correlate with a number of the decisions.
As I discovered while writing my erstwhile biography of U. S. Grant, any good story must first start with a suitable subject. The Battle of Antietam is one of the Civil War's most compelling, and a close examination of the facts should show even casual observers the remarkable significance and impact of the fighting. This battle quite literally changed the course of the war and possibly the history of our country. Fortunately for my credibility, I am not alone in that assessment.
Asserting that its legacy would “shape the nation for decades to come,” Steven M. Gillon lists the Battle of Antietam among the events he examines in10 Days That Unexpectedly Changed America. This list also includes the California Gold Rush, the assassination of Pres. William McKinley, and the infamous Scopes “monkey trial.”
InThe Gleam of Bayonets, author James V. Murfin states the following: “Few battles in which Americans died have left such a mark on history as did Antietam. Few battles have held in their final moments of victory and defeat the vast political, economic and military implications that did this bloodiest single day of the Civil War. Antietam was the turning point of the Confederacy; it was diplomatically speaking, one the decisive battles of the world; on it hinged the very existence of the United States.”
Stephen W. Sears’sLandscape Turned Redprovides this estimate of the critical engagement: “By almost any measure too, Antietam was pivotal in the history of the Civil War. In September 1862 events across a broad spectrum—military, political, social, and diplomatic—were rushing toward a climax. The battle in Maryland would affect all of them radically, turning the course of the war in new directions.”
InTo Antietam Creek: The Maryland Campaign of September 1862,D. Scott Hartwig notes the dramatic way in which the battle altered the nature of the Civil War: “September 17 and the Battle of Antietam slammed the door on a limited war; there would be no turning back. Either the South would be defeated and slavery in America destroyed, or what Lincoln believed to be ‘the last best hope on earth,’ the government and nation created by the Founding Fathers, would be in ruins and the independence of a Southern slaveholding republic a reality.”
Author and National Park Service ranger Daniel Vermilya’sThat Field of Blood(2018) states that the Battle of Antietam’s outcome profoundly altered the history of our republic: “Here the history of the United States had forever changed. This was the battle that turned the tide of Civil War, a Union victory at a time when one was sorely needed by the North. This was the battle that led to the Emancipation Proclamation.”5
Looking back after the Battle of Antietam was over, Abraham Lincoln did not overstate the significant political opportunities it had brought forth. Lincoln tapped into this long-awaited Union victory to change the focus of the war and the course of the nation by issuing the Emancipation Proclamation: “Things looked darker than ever. Finally, came the week of the battle of Antietam. I determined to wait no longer.”6 The implications of the Battle of Antietam, and the decisions made therein were far-reaching indeed.
It is my sincerest wish that you find this work a beneficial addition to your library and your study of this most decisive battle of the American Civil War.
A study of the critical decisions requires us to look at a particular series of events and then contemplate why they happened or what caused them to happen. We also have to ask, “What might have changed had this decision not been made in favor of another?” When this critical decision concept is understood, it can be applied to any battle in any war.
During the course of any historical event as complicated as the Battle of Antietam, actors on both sides of the conflict made thousands if not tens of thousands of decisions. Most of these are typical of any battle. While many of these choices can be considered significant, only a handful of them are considered critical. Critical decisions are not only momentous in their own right but also so important that they substantially shape the decisions and events that follow, thus forming the course of history. These criteria essentially define the characteristics of a critical decision. Simply stated, the study of critical decisions examines the why of a historical event as opposed to the what.
Studying these critical decisions quickly reveals that they are reached at every level of the military. Critical decisions can be strategic, operational, tactical, organizational, personnel related, or logistical.
In concentrating on the critical decisions, I lay out some basic facts to present a relatively clear outline of a very complex event. Where relevant, I include pertinent details, biographical and topographical information, and the situational narrative to provide the reader with an overview of why events developed as they did. I then outline the various options the decision-maker had before him, and what decision he ultimately made. Then the results and impact of the decision are examined along with what might have happened had an alternative decision been made in favor of the actual decision.
Judgments as to what constitutes a critical decision may differ, and many readers’ opinions will no doubt diverge from my own. The critical decision analysis is by its very nature somewhat subjective. For example, cases like the struggle for the West Woods or the Sunken Road involved many decisions, but the nature of the fighting makes precise analysis difficult.
This work assumes the reader has some basic knowledge of the battle, and understanding this fact is essential. This book is not intended to be a complete retelling or reinterpretation of the Battle of Antietam. I only briefly reference the very complicated and relevant political aspects adjacent to the 1862 Maryland Campaign, and I touch on but a few material points of the overall narrative. Any number of excellent books provide a more detailed analysis of those aspects of the campaign as a whole. They are not listed here, so the reader should refer to the bibliography as a guide for preliminary study. This book covers just those events and details relevant to the various decisions discussed. This work, by design, begins its main narrative on September 15, 1862. This is not a dismissal of the relevant events at South Mountain and Harpers Ferry that preceded this date, but a deliberate effort to keep this book at a reasonable length. A future volume will speak to the complex events that took place during the campaign as a whole and the critical decisions that brought both armies to the banks of the Antietam Creek.
As you read, you will notice that the Union and Confederacy used similar but often differing methods to identify units. Both sides identified units at the company, battalion, and regimental level in the same manner. Companies were distinguished by a letter—e.g., A Company, B Company, and so on. Regiments and battalions were usually designated by a number—e.g., Fifth (or 5th) Texas, Nineteenth (or 19th) Indiana. Above the regimental level, the Union and Confederacy took different approaches to identifying individual units.
The official designations of Union brigades, divisions, and corps were numeric and began with a capital letter. Examples include First Brigade, Second Division, Right Wing, Brig. Gen. James Nagle’s First Brigade, Maj. Gen. Israel B. Richardson’s First Division, Maj. Gen. Joseph Hooker’s First Corps, and Maj. Gen. Ambrose Burnside’s Right Wing. When referring to a brigade or division belonging to or commanded by an individual, lowercase letters are used. Examples include, Crawford’s brigade, Sedgwick’s division, Mansfield’s corps, and so on.
Early in the war, the Confederacy simultaneously used both numbering and naming systems for unit designations. The numbering system was used far less often than the naming system as the war progressed. Confederate brigades, divisions, and commands/corps were officially designated by the commanders’ last names followed by Brigade, Division, Command, or Corps. Examples include Hood’s Brigade, Anderson’s Division, and Jackson’s Command. Identification can also be problematic because multiple generals and colonels named Anderson, Hill, and Jones led units in the Army of Northern Virginia at that time.
The Confederate Congress did not authorize the designation of corps until September 18, 1862. Subsequently, Robert E. Lee did not organize his army into corps until November 6, 1862. Longstreet and Jackson unofficially had “commands” during the battle. However, after-action reports and various manuscripts alternately refer to these commands as corps and/or wings.
The Confederate system of unit designation can often be confusing. For example, Col. Vannoy H. Manning led the unit officially named Walker’s Brigade at Antietam. Manning’s brigade was in Walker’s Division at Antietam and commanded by Brig. Gen. John J. Walker. Walker had commanded the aforementioned brigade until June 1862. Therefore, Walker’s Brigade was part of Walker’s Division, with only the latter commanded by Walker himself. If that was not confusing enough, Col. James A. Walker commanded Trimble’s Brigade of Lawton’s Division at Antietam.
As is the case with many Civil War battles, Antietam has more than one name. In the South, the battle was called the Battle of Sharpsburg, and in the North, it was called the Battle of Antietam. Southerners tended to name engagements for the closest town, while Northerners tended to name them for the closest body of water. There were exceptions to this rule as well. The National Park Service officially named the battlefield Antietam, its present designation. To avoid identifying every battle twice in this book, I am sticking with the Northern naming convention going forward.
Determining the specific facts and events that occurred during the Civil War can be extremely problematic. As a result, understanding the precise number of combatants on each side of the conflict becomes a very circular discussion with no clear answer. To further complicate this situation, new research contradicting earlier assertions seems to be published every day. Additionally, as many students of the war understand, exact and standard timekeeping was not generally practiced in the nineteenth century. Readers should therefore add or subtract an hour from every time stated and increase or decrease every head count by 15 percent. Appendix 4 of this manuscript contains additional details on the two armies’ strengths and casualties.
A complete and thorough grasp of mid-nineteenth-century warfare often requires a study of the ground where these events took place. Topography plays a critical role in comprehension of a decision or event. Knowing what a decision-maker saw can often provide valuable insight that is otherwise obscured. Walking the battlefield of Antietam perfectly illustrates this fact. To better facilitate such understanding, I have included a battlefield guide (appendix 1) with tour stops that correlate with a number of the decisions.
As I discovered while writing my erstwhile biography of U. S. Grant, any good story must first start with a suitable subject. The Battle of Antietam is one of the Civil War's most compelling, and a close examination of the facts should show even casual observers the remarkable significance and impact of the fighting. This battle quite literally changed the course of the war and possibly the history of our country. Fortunately for my credibility, I am not alone in that assessment.
Asserting that its legacy would “shape the nation for decades to come,” Steven M. Gillon lists the Battle of Antietam among the events he examines in10 Days That Unexpectedly Changed America. This list also includes the California Gold Rush, the assassination of Pres. William McKinley, and the infamous Scopes “monkey trial.”
InThe Gleam of Bayonets, author James V. Murfin states the following: “Few battles in which Americans died have left such a mark on history as did Antietam. Few battles have held in their final moments of victory and defeat the vast political, economic and military implications that did this bloodiest single day of the Civil War. Antietam was the turning point of the Confederacy; it was diplomatically speaking, one the decisive battles of the world; on it hinged the very existence of the United States.”
Stephen W. Sears’sLandscape Turned Redprovides this estimate of the critical engagement: “By almost any measure too, Antietam was pivotal in the history of the Civil War. In September 1862 events across a broad spectrum—military, political, social, and diplomatic—were rushing toward a climax. The battle in Maryland would affect all of them radically, turning the course of the war in new directions.”
InTo Antietam Creek: The Maryland Campaign of September 1862,D. Scott Hartwig notes the dramatic way in which the battle altered the nature of the Civil War: “September 17 and the Battle of Antietam slammed the door on a limited war; there would be no turning back. Either the South would be defeated and slavery in America destroyed, or what Lincoln believed to be ‘the last best hope on earth,’ the government and nation created by the Founding Fathers, would be in ruins and the independence of a Southern slaveholding republic a reality.”
Author and National Park Service ranger Daniel Vermilya’sThat Field of Blood(2018) states that the Battle of Antietam’s outcome profoundly altered the history of our republic: “Here the history of the United States had forever changed. This was the battle that turned the tide of Civil War, a Union victory at a time when one was sorely needed by the North. This was the battle that led to the Emancipation Proclamation.”5
Looking back after the Battle of Antietam was over, Abraham Lincoln did not overstate the significant political opportunities it had brought forth. Lincoln tapped into this long-awaited Union victory to change the focus of the war and the course of the nation by issuing the Emancipation Proclamation: “Things looked darker than ever. Finally, came the week of the battle of Antietam. I determined to wait no longer.”6 The implications of the Battle of Antietam, and the decisions made therein were far-reaching indeed.
It is my sincerest wish that you find this work a beneficial addition to your library and your study of this most decisive battle of the American Civil War.