Rating: 
Summary: An interesting look at 1862 politics and war:
Review: James McPherson has taken the taken Battle of Antietam and brought together many references as to why this battle finally shaped or turned the tide for the Union. McPherson places the reader in 1862 and covers the struggles of the Union grasping with the possibilities that Southern independence may be gained. From various Union battle losses and growing disdain for Lincoln and his department, McPherson covers these ideas and concepts that are becoming an ever-growing concern in the North. McPherson discusses how the Confederacy was winning battles and lowering Northern morale while covering Lee's reasons for invading Maryland and just how much the Union had to lose if Lee were to be successful in the North. McPherson brings to light the watchful eyes of Britain and France as they determine who to favor if the South were continue their successes and pressure Washington. As this pressure mounts McPherson covers Lincoln's bold moves and reasons for bringing forth the Emancipation Proclamation and how the Battle of Antietam helped pave the way for its issuance. One chapter is actually devoted to the battle while others bring forth General McClellan's slow and cautious approach to war. Frustrations continue to grow within the Lincoln party before and after the battle while political unrest and turmoil haunt the Republicans' view of the future. This book brings a lot of these elements together. It shows how crucial this battle was for paving the way to show the Northern people that the Union wasn't fighting in vain and also that slavery had to be abolished. By doing this it presented a higher purpose for keeping the war effort intact and to also win the favor of Britain and France. I highly recommend this book to people that are looking to understand the political aspects of the war while also learning about Lincoln's reasonings for his actions. This book does not cover the battle like traditional books about Antietam and would most likely be for those who have already read about the battle at one time or another.
Rating: 
Summary: rated G for general audiences...
Review: McPherson offers a generalized look at the "battle", while offering many behind-the-scenes insights to the significance of this blood-marred day. The reader should be aware this is NOT a detailed account of the military campaign or any other such troop movement minutia. A "big picture" is developed. This is an excellent book for the casual reader or a novice in Antietam or civil war studies. A nice overview which can lead into other more detailed military accounts.This is my second read of a work by McPherson, and on both efforts I've been very impressed with his writing. As I've digested Shelby Foote's biblical efforts, I had no desire to read Battle Cry of Freedom, but McPherson display a "comfortable" style of writing, similiar to Foote. As I read Foote, I had the impression he was in my study "telling me a story". I had the same feel with McPherson. His text has a nice flow. Well done, indeed.
Rating:
Summary: A Good Book for the Non Civil War Specialist
Review: This book is not worth all the mention it has been getting by professional reviewers. Yes, it was an important battle, but this short book really just gives us an overview. It is fine for the non Civil War specialist, but those who are maniacal about the Civil War will want more detail.
Rating:
Summary: Shows the battle's political significance.
Review: If you are looking for a book that describes the way Antietam was fought strategically and tactically, look elsewhere. But if you want to understand the significance this battle had politically, this is your book. McPherson expertly explains that the Battle of Antietam may have been the most important battle fought during the Civil War. The battle came at a time where the North was militarily on it's heals and the South was close to being recognized by France and England. The Democrats were making headway in the North, and the upcoming election held the possibility of House of Representatives becoming controlled by the Democrats. Antietam changes all of this - the Union regains military control, Europe does not recognize the Confederacy, and the Republicans hold the House. But most importantly, Lincoln gains the victory he needs in order to issue the Emancipation Proclemation. Not only does this free the slaves in the states in rebellion, but it changes the character of the war - from one fought to preserve the Union the way it was before the war to one fought to create a new Union. McPherson has given us an important work in allowing us to see how Antietam changed the war.
Rating: 
Summary: Shocked that is wasn't better
Review: This is a tired book....one that covers no new ground whatsoever. It reads like a rushed college term paper. Considering the repuation of the author, it's shocking that this book is not better. Don't waste your time. Read "Landscape Turned Red" if you want to study this battle.
Rating:
Summary: "Landscape turned red"
Review: This brief but excellent work gives an overview leading up to, and the consequences that followed from, the battle of Antietam in September 1862. This was a clash brtween the forces of Generals Lee and McClellan, and is considered a Union victory of sorts, because it blunted the Confederate drive into the Northern territory of that year, and led to the issuing of the Emancipation Proclamation. Additionally, it ended a drift by the European powers to recognize the Southern states as an independant nation. For all of these reasons this was an extremely important fight, and the concise writing condenses everything into a work that can be easily read in only a few hours. Despite its brevity, it gives the general reader an acute sense of time and place, and puts him into the thick of things. McClellan, of course, comes out of this work as he does from most thoughtful writings as a timid general, more interested in training his men, and having them worship him, than actually committing them to a battle with the complete will to win. Constantly overestimating his enemies' strength, he was a sluggard in movement, and a critic of his political leaders, who probably took to heart his appellation as "The Young Napoleon". Only when he was finally relieved from command did he show that he had a sense of loyalty to the government by refusing many requests to take his army to Washington and overthrow the government. Lee comes across as a risk taker, who would gamble his army on the perceived foibles of his opponents. He alone, it may be safe to say, kept the Southern states in the war for many extra months than they should have been, due to his intellect and grasp of tactics and his opponents' shortcomings. This is an excellent book to read on an important subject, and I highly recommend it.
Rating: 
Summary: A good but already known overview of the ACW early years
Review: James McPherson has written a good book about the why's and how's the Civil War was being waged from its beginning at Ft. Sumter in 1861 to the Battle of Antietam (or Battle of Sharpsburg as the Confederacy called it). I expected McPherson to give detail about the battle itself. However, the book is about the "why's" and "how" the war was being waged. That being said, it was an interesting read, but nothing that the most casual Civil War historian dosen't already know or should know at the very least. Many author's that are well known and not as well known as McPherson have already written about the beginning years of the Civil War (Bruce Catton, Shelby Foote, E. Bearss, etc) and most have the same conclusions to the why's and how's the Civil War was being waged in the beginning. It would of been an outstanding read if McPherson would of drawn the reader into the depth of the Battle of Antietam. However, that was not the author's objective. That is fine, I can understand that, however, he should of changed the title of the book to "The first years of the Civil War" or "A summary of the conflict from 1861 to 1862". If McPherson had changed the title, it would help readers from the beginning know what McPherson's thesis would be from the onset. Don't get me wrong, it is a good book, but if you want to know the specifics about the Battle of Antietam, look elsewhere.
Rating:
Summary: Yawn....
Review: This book was very disappointing. I bought "Crossroads of Freedom - Antietam" expecting a volume detailing the battle at Antietam. What I got was a short book rehashing the general history of the Civil War. As a matter of fact, I don't believe there are more then 20 pages in this entire book devoted to the battle at Antietam. I would not recommend this book to others.
Rating:
Summary: A good, but needlessly thin book
Review: McPherson's "Crossroads of Freedom: Antietam" is McPherson's assertion that the south lost the war at Sharpsburg, Maryland in the September of 1862. While an enjoyable read, the book is a bit on the thin side and it did not have to be. He does an excellent job of providing the reader with an examination of the larger politico-military situation running up to what was the bloodiest single day in American history. This is the book's main strength. By the time the reader actually reaches General Robert E. Lee's first invasion of the north, one has a real feel for the true ebb and flow of the war. McPherson takes us to other theatres of operations, into politics of both the Northern and Southern governments (although, as is common with most Civil War works, the North gets the deeper examination), the politics within the Union Army, into the morale of the Northern and Southern people, and into the deliberations of the British and French governments regarding recognition of the South. The reader should almost feel Abraham's exasperation with his own constituents and the governments of Europe: after a string of major strategic successes, everyone seems to think that the war is on the verge of being lost because of Lee's string of tactical victories. NONE of the effects of the previous successes were overturned by Lee's victories, yet panic was rampant and many feared (or anticipated) the North's loss of the war. This is followed by the battle of Antietam itself. From an editor's perspective, this is the book's major failing. The book is a bit short, and it is in describing the battle itself that McPherson has made it short. While Antietam is hardly new ground, the book is about the battle and it's place as a pivotal moment in the course of the Civil War. McPherson discusses the battle just enough to demonstrate General George McClellan's tactical incompetence, and leaves it at that. The drama of the bloodiest day in American history is left undelivered. McPherson tells us that by failing to win this battle, the South essentially lost the war, but the struggle itself was merely summarized. If I were McPherson's editor, I would have sent it back and told him to split the battle into two chapters at least - one dealing with the discovery of Lee's Special Order, Harper's Ferry and the fighting at South Mountain, and the other with the battle itself. It would have done a lot for the book to deal with the battle in more detail. Following Antietam, McPherson returns to what is this strength - non-combat related material. He concludes his book by examining the impact of the Emancipation Proclamation with the same scope and attention he employed in his build up to the battle of Antietam. Here he concludes his thesis that the loss of Antietam cost the South the war, for it cost the South any hope of foreign intervention in the war. He also details the beginning of the war's transformation from a war to preserve the Union into a war to end slavery. Overall, I think the book is an enjoyable read, even for serious Civil War buffs. The wide scope McPherson employs in bringing the various social, political and military threads of 1862 together is the book's main strength, and coupled with a good writing style, that makes it a joy to read. I would like to give it four stars, but I cannot because of its cursory examination of the actual battle of Antietam. It is a major omission and one that would have been ridiculously simple to fill.
Rating:
Summary: Gettysburg was a more important battle
Review: McPherson is great at explaining the social and political issues of the Civil War and this book does that every well. My complaint is not that it doesn't go into the actual battle more thoroughly, but that he gives reasons why Antietam was such a pivotal battle and then stretches the point to say it was the most important battle of the CW. That can't be true, because the next major battle, Fredericksburg, was a terrible defeat for the North and emboldened Lee to bring his army to Pennsylvania in the summer of 1864. After his defeat at Gettysburg, the Confederates never crossed the Potomac, at least not with their whole army. And it was straight down south for the North under Grant from them on. I agree that a narrow win at Antietam was vital for the North, but Gettysburg actually turned the tide of the war, not just the politics of it.
| 
