From: KARLIN@BNLCL6.BNL.GOV (P.L. Cowan)
Subject: Re: The most decisive battles in history ?
Summary: DIscussion of the decisiveness of the battle of Antietam
Keywords: Antietam, Civil War, Lincoln, England
Reply-To: COWAN@ANL.GOV
Organization: BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 21:58:52 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.23

In <1992Aug27.144627.26705@nntp.hut.fi> c34657b@saha.hut.fi writes:

: 
: Not a long time ago there was a thread about the greatest general for ever
: (and the worst ever). Since time has passed, it is now the time to ask
: which have been the most decisive battle/s in the history ?
: 
: You may answer any or make your list. My own top twenty will follow soon.
: 
:   ++ Tuomas Viljanen                     ++ For a battle like Crecy, you do  ++
:   ++ Lahderanta 20 A 19                  ++ not need a military genius like  ++
:   ++ SF-02720 Espoo 72 FINLAND           ++ Edward III. All you need is an   ++
:   ++ 358-0-592175 or c34657b@saha.hut.fi ++ idiot like the Duke of Alencon.  ++

I'd like to mention the Battle of Antietam in the American Civil War, September
17, 1862. This battle, though one of the bloodiest, was far from decisive in
the military sense (it was essentially a draw) but was very decisive on the
course of subsequent history due to the following political circumstances:

1) The British Foreign Secretary, Lord Russell, had urged the Prime Minister,
Lord Palmerston, that the time was right for France and England to intervene in
the war in favor of separation. Palmerston agreed, pending a favorable (for the
Confederacy) outcome of the on-going military campaign (Antietam).

2) Lincoln had decided the only way to avoid European intervention (on the side
of the South) was to explicitly state that the North was fighting to end
slavery. He made this decision in July 1862, but was waiting for a military
victory to announce it (the Emancipation Proclamation) so it would not appear
to be a move of desperation.

The nominal victory by the North at Antietam gave Lincoln the opportunity he
needed. He issued the Emancipation Proclamation within days of the battle.
After that, it was politically impossible for England to explicitly support the
Confederacy, since the English people were strongly opposed to slavery.
The Confederacy's prospects of achieving independence without outside support
were never very bright. Eventually the Union was preserved.

Had the North lost yet another battle, the machinery for English and French
intervention would likely have begun to roll. It is doubtful that the
Emancipation Proclamation (issued after a string of military defeats and with
the European powers acting to impose peace) would have had enough credibility
to reverse the process. It is likely that the combined interests of England and
France would have ended the war in favor of the South (as Spain and France had
ended the American War for Independence in favor of the colonies). Subsequent
world history, with a fragmented United States, is a matter of speculation, but
it is fair to say it would have been altered significantly.

The fascinating bit of trivia connected with the battle of Antietam, is that it
is unlikely that the Union Army would have trapped Lee's Army at Sharpsburg in
the first place had not a private in an Indiana infantry regiment, B. Mitchell,
found a copy of Lee's orders (wrapped around some cigars) near Lee's abandoned
headquarters at Frederick.



---------------------------------------------------------------------------
P. L. Cowan     Please send replies, comments etc. (no flames thank you) to 
COWAN@ANL.GOV   (I'm posting this from a friend's account)

     "I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall 
adopt new views so fast as they appear to be true views." 
  -  A. Lincoln, Letter to the Editor, New York Tribune, August 22, 1862

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: alt.war