Battle of Antietam is a historic battle fought between two army units comprising of Union Army and

Confederate Army. Both camps had able leaders in General Robert E. Lee and Major General George B.
McClellan. Antietam was a crucial battle among the other two because it marked the declaration of the
bill of Emancipation Proclamation by President Abraham Lincoln. This paper discusses the battle analysis
of Antietam, and discusses the subject, reviews the setting, and draws insights from important events of
the battle.

Define the subject:

The subject in the definition is the Battle of Antietam, fought on September 17, 1862, between
Confederate and Union. The commander-in-chief of the Confederate was General Robert E. Lee, and the
person in charge of the Union was Major General George B. McClellan. The battle is also known as the
Battle of Sharpsburg. Similarly, the battle is understood to have killed about 23,000 men from each
camp and several wounded. In addition to it, it was the first battle to mark the invasion of the North in
the United States of America. (Ural, 2012). As a key part of the American Civil War, Antietam is a battle
of the courage of an undermanned group of Confederates with a formidable group in Union. In this
Battle Analysis, we will review the strategic and tactical standpoint of the operation involved in the
Battle of Antietam.

All three battles, namely Corinth, Antietam, and Perryville, have historical significance, but Antietam is
special, as British or French intervention to support Confederacy was ruled out. (DiNardo, 2004). The
September 1862 Maryland battle was one of the most important military engagements of the American
Civil War. As Confederates stormed the Potomac, George B. McClellan, who had lately returned to the
limelight following a bungled effort during the Seven Days combat, attempted to assemble Union forces
in the neighborhood of Washington. Following his spectacular win over John Pope's Army of Virginia at
Second Manassas, Robert E. Lee proceeded into Maryland. (Gallagher, 1999).

Review the setting:

On the dawn of September 17, 1862, 130,000 army men embarked on the battle. Despite the day not
being clear, McClellan's battle plan was to put up the offensive and steamroll Lee's army. The combat
started at 6:00 a.m. with a Union assault into Miller's Cornfield and moved almost north to south along a
three-mile-long and half-mile wide front. The Cornfield's 30 acres would pass directly six times in three
hours, resulting in 10,000 casualties. (Tooker, 2007).

Strategies: From the early beginning of the Civil War, the Union Army dedicated its efforts to cut supply
channels of the southern part of America. This strategy was believed to trouble the south's economy to
compel people to submit to the Union Army. The constitution control of the civilians over the military
could not survive, and the Union Army entertained thoughts of taking control over the government. The
strategy of conciliation was based on the principle that winning some important victories on the
periphery of the south would eventually force people into desperation and ultimately accede to the
Union. (Clemens, 2013).
One of the strategies employed by the Confederates was to defend against aggression by solidifying the
southern part of the country. In addition, their aim was to get aid from European nations, which they
believed would demoralize the northern neighbors. However, the Confederate Army also wanted to use
aggressive methods, but it was never in the plans of the commanding officer.

On the other hand, the Union Army had different plans. Their approach was offensive, and aggression
was clearly visible. Union strategized by blocking all entries to the southern part, which was also
referred to as the Anaconda Plan. The planning also consisted of controlling the Mississippi River, as the
river was the gateway to important Confederate states in Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas. Their
approach also included capturing the capital city of the Confederate, Richmond, and demoralizing the
southern population by taking command of South Carolina.

Battle of Antietam became an engaging battle due to the operational setting of both sides, which will be
evident when comparison of battle arms of both Confederate and Union are compared head to head.

During the Civil War, the Army of Northern Virginia's artillery regularly had a repository of superior
weaponry and ammunition. R. E. Lee's artillery men could only hope to get that ammunition. Southern
gunners were at a disadvantage regarding friction primers, horseflesh, cannon tubes, and case shot. As a
result, containment wars were unavoidable for them. (Krick, 1999)

Robert Lee is adamant about battling the Union Army and wants to keep his conviction of leading the
American front. His fortunes changed when he had to divide his force to fight with the powerful Union
Army. Lee's foray into Maryland is a calculated risk in the hopes of inflicting another crushing defeat on
the United States capital. General George B. McClellan, on the other hand, marches with incredible
speed and pursuit. He learned about Lee's operational strategy when he received an intercepted copy of
Lee's original plan plot.

Describe the action:

Robert E. Lee chooses a decent defensive position amidst the clean manicured German farm fields,
beside a quickly tumbling brook, but prefers to wait for the onslaught. McClellan takes two days to learn
more about Lee's position. He believes Lee outnumbers him by a large margin, which was a risky bluff. If
Lee is forced to retreat, he has one option: to return to Virginia. McClellan decides to assault on the
afternoon of September 16. McClellan's initial attack begins early Wednesday morning, September 17,
when his soldiers march south, aiming for Dunker Church, after sending his troops to Antietam streams.
While Stonewall Jackson's infantry confronts them near Miller's Cornfield, Confederates occupy the high
ground and launch deadly artillery fire on Hooker's forces to their front and right. Hooker retaliates with
his weapon. The violence here swiftly escalates into some of the most ferocious civil war warfare ever
seen.

By 7 a.m., Hooker has made significant progress in the Cornfield, and Jackson's line has gone left-wing
and is on the verge of collapsing. On the other hand, the counteroffensive forces discover a means to
relieve, and one division of the force succeeds in reclaiming the lost ground. General Hooker is forced to
leave the action after being shot in the left foot. The Union's victory at the Dunker Church is not
followed up quickly. General Sumner leads the 2nd Corps into a battle at about 9 a.m., despite his
division being just half the size of Lee's entire force. In the end, the Confederate onslaught overwhelms
the Union Army. Lee's half-men was eventually battered and bruised but not broken.
The conflict switches to the south the next morning, and just three of General Sumner's regiment's ten
divisions have seen combat. Despite committing about 5000 troops to the offensive, the Confederates
suffered a devastating loss in the engagement, with nearly half of the whole force falling in the first
twenty minutes. The battle claimed the lives of 2,200 men. Approximately 23,000 troops were killed,
wounded, or missing when the war came to a close after a twelve-hour battle. The Battle of Antietam is
remembered as the bloodiest civil war in American history. On the early hours of September 18, 1862, a
northern reporter trudged solemnly along Roulette Lane, appalled by the Federal bodies that littered the
fields surrounding him. (Krick, 1999).

Lessons and Insights:

The Battle of Antietam yielded the following results, forever transforming America's face. First, the fight
was vital in defeating the Confederate invasion of the North. Despite losing the war, the Union Army
was able to retain the fort against the invading Confederate Army. The Union Army's tenacity was
influential in establishing control of the opposition. Second, on the assurance that rebels had been
pushed out of Pennsylvania and Maryland, Abraham Lincoln issued a proclamation of liberation for
enslaved people. Slave emancipation would release slaves in the rebellion states if they did not agree to
join the Union by January 1, 1863, as many men were killed in the Antietam fight.

Thirdly, France and Britain had to wait on the sidelines. As both countries wanted cotton from the south,
the cotton supply could not continue due to the blockage of the south. Moreover, from the
emancipation of the slaves, the European nations could not intervene and remained neutral on the
issue. The fourth benefit was that it lifted the morale of the Union Army. They had high morale as
opposed to the depleted morale of the Confederate Army.

Fifthly, the Battle of Antietam fuelled the rise of Lincoln to power with the proclamation of emancipation
of slaves. The failure of war would have pressurized Lincoln to resign. Still, with the victory of the
Confederate, his popularity rose, and he was able to maintain a majority in the House. Finally, McClellan
was relieved of the duty of Major General. The main reason for his dismissal was to allow the rebels to
retreat when the size of his army could have easily overwhelmed the undersized man of the Union.

The battle of Antietam or any other battle has key personnel who make an impact in decision-making.
Whereas the Confederate had lesser personnel than the Union, their leader did not make the right
decision, which ultimately affected the outcome. McClellan, the Major General of the Confederate
Army, made a blunder by overestimating the numbers of the Confederate army and could not shield his
flanks from cavalry vedettes. His chief advisor brought the wrong numbers of the enemy, and it made a
mistake by overestimating the actual number of personnel of the Confederate Army. McClellan
squandered the tactical advantage by creating a questionable decision in moving slowly by taking more
than three days to attack the Confederate. In other words, McClellan could not achieve the overall
objective and lost the tactical battle with Robert E. Lee. Robert came to know of the tactical error and
got time to rearrange his troops and be well prepared for the offensive. (Konieczny, 2019).

The four areas of learning from the Battle of Antietam provide an understanding of the meaning of
organization, readiness, modernization, and reform. Military training is the core part of the life of an
army and teaches necessary lessons to deal with complex decisions and tactical and operational
dilemmas. (McConville, 2020). In the Battle of Antietam, poor tactics led to losses of men. Therefore, in
today's world, similar to the tactical error made in Antietam, the wrong strategy can lead to irreparable
losses. Leadership plays a vital role in wars, and poor decision-making will affect the entire mission. For
example, when McClellan decided to leave the retreating rebellion of the Confederate, Abraham Lincoln
stripped him of the position of Major General. Miscalculations made based on the assumption in a battle
do not constitute becoming a winner, and failure of intended actions was the reason for the downfall of
McClellan. Therefore, this blunder was why Lincoln dismissed him from the Army of Potomac. (Hansen,
2013).

The lesson readiness is demonstrated in understanding the rank of soldiers fighting the battle. As
Generals are well-positioned on a horse to see the action from additional height, the same cannot be
perceived by soldiers on foot. Thus, readiness and planning of the mission can only be done when both
the commanding officer and soldier have the same vantage point. In today's era, leaders should not
make decisions based on their perceptions but should take suggestions from all concerned parties. This
cooperation can easily defeat the flaws of one-sided thinking. Modern warfare methods and weapons
are inseparable from the battle, and the Battle of Antietam was fought with guns, knives, and artillery.
Those war weapons are not entirely modern but were sufficient for the setting in that era. The lack of
preparation from the 9th New Hampshire Infantry was evident on September 14, 1862, when they were
found short of equipment, guns, and uniforms. (Hartwig, 1999).

Modernization of warfare weapons in today's world has seen sweeping changes from land warfare to air
warfare and ultimately to nuclear war. In the past lower-ranked officials did not get the latest weapons
for war. Even now, in the army, lower-ranked privates and sergeants do not get modern guns for the
fight, whereas the higher-ranked officials enjoy the privilege of using the latest guns. Furthermore,
lesser trained soldiers faced a higher risk of casualty in the Battle of Antietam, which brings forward the
importance of training. The only way the situation can be improved is through high-class training of
soldiers so that they become war-ready. In addition to that, battle soldiers always look up to their leader
for command, and sound decision-making is indispensable for a commanding officer stationed in a
battle.

In summary, the Battle of Maryland in September 1862 was one of the most pivotal military battles of
the American Civil War. Before dawn, one hundred thirty thousand army men embarked on the battle
on September 17, 1862. Poor tactics cost men their lives at the Battle of Antietam. As a result, in today's
society, the wrong plan, like the tactical blunder at Antietam, can result in irreversible losses. In a
conflict, leadership is crucial, and poor decision-making can derail the entire effort. Mistakes based on
assumptions in combat do not equal victory, and McClellan's defeat was due to his failure to carry out
his intended activities. In today's world, the modernization of combat weaponry has witnessed vast
advances from land warfare to air warfare, and finally to nuclear warfare.
Clemens, T. (2013). The Long Road to Antietam: How the Civil War Became a Revolution. Civil War Book
Review, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.31390/cwbr.15.2.25

DiNardo, R.L. (2004). [Review of the book Crossroads of Freedom. Antietam: The Battle that Changed
the Course of the Civil War]. The Journal of Military History 68(2), 607-608. doi:10.1353/jmh.2004.0033.

KRICK, R. K. (1999). It Appeared As Though Mutual Extermination Would Put a Stop to the Awful
Carnage: Confederates in Sharpsburg’s Bloody Lane. In G. W. Gallagher (Ed.), The Antietam Campaign
(pp. 223–258). University of North Carolina Press. https://doi.org/10.5149/9780807835913_gallagher.11

KRICK, R. E. L. (1999). Defending Lee’s Flank: J.E.B. Stuart, John Pelham, and Confederate Artillery on
Nicodemus Heights. In G. W. Gallagher (Ed.), The Antietam Campaign (pp. 192–222). University of North
Carolina Press. https://doi.org/10.5149/9780807835913_gallagher.10

‌ allagher, G. W. (Ed.). (1999). Introduction. In The Antietam Campaign (pp. ix–1). University of North
G
Carolina Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5149/9780807835913_gallagher.3

Hansen, S. (2018). Review of “The Long Road to Antietam: How the Civil War Became a Revolution.” The
Councilor: A Journal of the Social Studies, 74(1). http://thekeep.eiu.edu/the_councilor/vol74/iss1/3

HARTWIG, D. S. (1999). Who Would Not Be a Soldier: The Volunteers of ’62 in the Maryland Campaign.
In G. W. Gallagher (Ed.), The Antietam Campaign (pp. 143–168). University of North Carolina Press.
https://doi.org/10.5149/9780807835913_gallagher.8

Konieczny, J. (2019). What Went Wrong Before Antietam? The Histories, 5(2).
https://digitalcommons.lasalle.edu/the_histories/vol5/iss2/3

McConville, J. (2020). Moral Leadership. Department of the Army Pamphlet 165-19.

Ural, S. J. (2012). Battle of Antietam. Oxford Bibliographies Online Datasets.

https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199791279-0016

Tooker J. (2007). Antietam: aspects of medicine, nursing and the civil war. Transactions of the American
Clinical and Climatological Association, 118, 215–223.