The Battle of New Orleans was remarkable both for its apparent brevity and its casualties, though some numbers are in dispute and contradict the official statistics. The defenders of the Left Bank had casualties amounting to 11 killed and 23 wounded; American losses were only 13 killed, 39 wounded, and 19 missing or captured in total on that day. Robert Remini and William C Davis make reference to the British casualty reports of 291 killed, 1,262 wounded, and 484 missing, a total loss of 2,037 men. Among the prisoners taken when the British retreated from the battlefield, Jackson estimated three hundred were mortally wounded. Colonel Arthur P. Hayne's dispatch to Jackson dated January 13 estimated the British had 700 fatalities and 1400 wounded, with 501 prisoners of war in his custody. A reduction in headcount due to 443 British soldiers' deaths since the prior month was reported on January 25, which is lower than Hayne's estimate of 700 for the battle alone.

The large number of casualties suffered by the British on the Left Bank reflects their failure to maintain the element of surprise, with plenty of advance notice being given to the defenders, owing to the delays in executing the attack on the Right Bank. The failure of the British to have breached the parapet and conclusively eliminated the first line of defense was to result in high casualties as successive waves of men marching in column whilst the prepared defenders were able to direct their fire into a Kill zone, hemmed in by the riverbank and the swamp. The American cannon opened fire when the British were at 500 yards, the riflemen at 300 yards, and the muskets at 100 yards.

Reilly supports the assertion that it was the American artillery that won the battle. The losses among the regiments out of range of small arms fire were disproportionately high, with almost every British account emphasizing the effect of heavy gunfire. In contrast, the riflemen of the 95th Foot in skirmish order, the most difficult target for artillery, had lost only 11 killed. Dickson's eyewitness account is clear that the British were only within musket shot range for less than five minutes. The account by Latour states the battalions of Plauché, Daquin, Lacoste, along with three quarters of the 44th US Infantry did not fire at all. In order to have inflicted such a heavy toll on the British, it would not have been possible to have done this primarily with musket fire, of which the best trained men could only manage two shots per minute. Unlike their British counterparts, the American forces had larger guns, and more of them. They were situated in well-protected earthworks, with a ditch and stockade. The Americans therefore had a number of advantages, but they should not minimize the skill and bravery of their gunners. Stoltz is of the opinion that Jackson was victorious because an American army guarded a strategic choke point and defended it with professionally designed fieldworks and artillery.

Almost universal blame was assigned to Colonel Mullins of the 44th Foot which had been detailed to carry fascines and ladders to the front to enable the British soldiers to cross the ditch and scale the parapet and fight their way to the American breastwork. Mullins was found half a mile to the rear when he was needed at the front. Pakenham learned of Mullins' conduct and placed himself at the head of the 44th, endeavoring to lead them to the front with the implements needed to storm the works, when he fell wounded after being hit with grapeshot. He was hit again while being helped to mount a horse, this time mortally wounded.

Pakenham's choice of units has come under question. Pakenham's aide, Wylly, was scornful about the 44th Foot, and thought the 21st Foot was lacking in discipline. His most experienced infantry regiments, the 7th Foot and 43rd Foot, veterans of Wellington's Peninsular War army, were kept in reserve in the plan of attack.

The inability of Thornton's troops to have taken the Right Bank at night, in advance of the main assault, meant that the British were enfiladed by the American batteries. It has been observed that Keane's failure, to have taken the Chef Menteur Road, was compounded when the aggressively natured Pakenham went ahead and launched a frontal assault before the vital flank operation on the other bank of the river had been completed, at a cost of over 2,000 casualties.

Poor British planning and communication, plus costly frontal assaults against an entrenched enemy, caused lopsided British casualties. The Duke of Wellington was saddened by the death of this man, his brother-in-law, with whom he had been on campaign in Spain. A grieving Wellington vented his anger towards Cochrane, whom he blamed:

I cannot but regret that he was ever employed on such a service or with such a colleague. The expedition to New Orleans originated with that colleague ... The Americans were prepared with an army in a fortified position which still would have been carried, if the duties of others, that is of the Admiral [Cochrane], had been as well performed as that of he whom we now lament.

Patterson notes that the plan of attack was not his own, he conceded to follow it, despite his reservations, and his death prevented him from reformulating a subsequent attack, following the initial failure.

Reilly opines that the brilliance of Cochrane's plan to take possession of the Right Bank batteries was fully comprehended, after its capture. He believes it was the failure of Pakenham's staff to wake him, and to let him know the Right Bank landing was not possible, neither at daylight, nor with the numbers of soldiers originally envisaged, more than any other action or omission in the entire campaign, that was the biggest failure on the part of the British that led to proceed with the attack, with the disastrous outcome that day.

Regarding the American forces on the Right Bank, Reilly states their defenses were inadequate, and that Morgan's deployment of his troops was incompetent. The resultant court of inquiry made no mention of General David Bannister Morgan at all.

Fort St. Philip, manned by an American garrison, defended the river approach to New Orleans. British naval forces attacked the fort on January 9 but withdrew after ten days of bombardment with exploding bomb shells from two bomb vessels, mounting a total of four mortars. In a dispatch sent to the Secretary of War, dated January 19, Jackson stated: "I am strengthened not only by [the defeat of the British at New Orleans] ... but by the failure of his fleet to pass fort St. Philip."

Despite news of capture of the American battery on the west bank of the Mississippi River, British officers concluded that continuing the Louisiana campaign would be too costly. Three days after the battle, General Lambert held a council of war. Deciding to withdraw, the British left camp at Villeré's Plantation by January 19. They were not pursued in any strength. The Chalmette battlefield was the plantation home of Ignace Martin de Lino (1755–1815), a Spanish veteran of the American Revolutionary War. The British returned to where they had landed, a distance in excess of sixty miles. The final troops re-embarked on January 27.

The British fleet embarked the troops on February 4, 1815 and sailed toward Dauphin Island at Mobile Bay on February 7, 1815. The army captured Fort Bowyer at the entrance to Mobile Bay on February 12. Preparations to attack Mobile were in progress when news arrived of the Treaty of Ghent. General Jackson also had made tentative plans to attack the British at Mobile and to continue the war into Spanish Florida. With Britain having ratified the treaty and the United States having resolved that hostilities should cease pending imminent ratification, the British left, sailing to the West Indies. The British government was determined on peace with the United States, and speculation that it planned to permanently seize the Louisiana Purchase has been rejected by historians. Thus Carr concludes, "by the end of 1814 Britain had no interest in continuing the conflict for the possession of New Orleans or any other part of American territory, but rather, due to the European situation and her own domestic problems, was anxious to conclude hostilities as quickly and gracefully as possible."

It would have been problematic for the British to continue the war in North America, due to Napoleon's escape from Elba on February 26, 1815, which ensured their forces were needed in Europe. General Lambert participated in the Battle of Waterloo, as did the 4th Foot.

In his general orders of January 21, General Jackson, in thanking the troops, paid special tributes to the Louisiana organizations, and made particular mention of Capts. Dominique and Belluche, and the Lafitte brothers, all of the Barataria privateers; of General Garrique de Flanjac, a State Senator, and brigadier of militia, who served as a volunteer; of Majors Plauche, St. Geme. Lacoste, D'Aquin, Captain Savary, Colonel De la Ronde, General Humbert, Don Juan de Araya, the Mexican Field-Marshal; Major-General Villeré and General Morgan, the Engineers Latour and Blanchard; the Attakapas dragoons, Captain Dubuclay; the cavalry from the Felicianas and the Mississippi territory. General Labattut had command of the town, of which Nicolas Girod was then the mayor.

Among those who most distinguished themselves during this brief but memorable campaign, were, next to the Commander-in-chief, Generals Villeré, Carroll, Coffee, Ganigues, Flanjac, Colonel Delaronde, Commodore Patterson, Majors Lacoste, Planche, Hinds, Captain Saint Gerne, Lieutenants Jones, Parker, Marent, and Dominique; Colonel Savary, a man of colour nor must we omit to mention Lafitte, pirate though he was.

For the campaign, American casualties totaled 333 with 55 killed, 185 wounded, and 93 missing, while British casualties totaled 2,459 with 386 killed, 1,521 wounded, and 552 missing, according to the respective official casualty returns. A reduction in headcount due to 443 British soldiers' deaths since the prior month was reported on January 25. The effective strength of the British had reduced from 5,933 to 4,868 soldiers of the original force, bolstered by 681 and 785 soldiers of the 7th Foot and 43rd Foot respectively. More than 600 prisoners of war were released from Jackson's captivity by March 1815.

The hundreds of dead British soldiers were likely buried at Jacques Villeré's plantation, which was the headquarters of the British Army during the New Orleans campaign. Nobody knows exactly where their final resting spot is. The only deceased British soldiers transported back to the United Kingdom were Generals Pakenham and Gibbs. Lieutenant Colonel Robert Rennie was buried by the 7th US Infantry, as ordered by Jackson, and his personal effects were passed on to Norman Pringle (an officer of the 21st Foot), via a flag of truce, to be forwarded on to Rennie's widow.

A discredited historical interpretation holds that British had an ambitious colonization plan for the "Crown colony of Louisiana" if they had succeeded in capturing New Orleans and Mobile. While some British generals did speculate, the British government under Lord Liverpool rejected all such ideas and planned to finalize the peace by ratifying the Treaty of Ghent as soon as possible, regardless of what happened in New Orleans. Cavell notes that there is little in the correspondence to imply that Britain planned to permanent occupy or to annex New Orleans or Louisiana territory, and Davis states in his book 'no one in [the British] government seems to have advocated permanent possession'.

Both sides faced challenges with logistics. This was especially the case for the British. The shortage of small boats had a noticeable impact when the landing on the Right Bank was made with only a third of the force originally planned, and they arrived far later than the time when they were supposed to arrive. The transport ships with the 26 artillery pieces of the siege train did not arrive until January 11, and would not see action until the engagement at Fort Bowyer on February 7, 1815. The poor quality of the roads through the swampy terrain, coupled with the lack of horses, was a burden upon the British supply network. These logistical shortcomings of the British were a precursor to similar issues that would be experienced during the Crimean War.

The battle became historically important mainly for the meaning Americans gave it, particularly with respect to Jackson. According to Matthew Warshauer, the Battle of New Orleans meant, "defeating the most formidable army ever arrayed against the young republic, saving the nation' s reputation in the War of 1812, and establishing [Jackson] as America's preeminent hero." News of victory "came upon the country like a clap of thunder in the clear azure vault of the firmament, and traveled with electromagnetic velocity, throughout the confines of the land." Popular pamphlets, songs, editorials, speeches, and plays glorified Jackson's new, heroic image.

The Eighth of January was a federal holiday from 1828 to 1861, and it was among the earliest national celebrations, as "previously, Americans had only celebrated events such as the Fourth of July or George Washington's birthday on a national scale". The anniversary of the battle was celebrated as an American holiday for many years called "The Eighth".

The historiography has been revisited by contemporary historians. According to Troy Bickham, the American victory at New Orleans "did not have an impact on the war's outcome", but it shaped "how the Americans received the end of the war by creating the illusion of military victory." Benn notes while American popular memory focused on the victories at Baltimore, Plattsburgh, and New Orleans to present the war as a successful effort to assert American national honor, or a Second War of Independence, in which the mighty British Empire was humbled and humiliated. In keeping with this sentiment, there is a popularly held view that Britain had planned to annex Louisiana in 1815. The amoral depravity of the British, in contrast with the wholesome behavior of the Americans, has the "beauty and booty" story at the center of a popular history account of Jackson's victory at New Orleans. According to historian Alan Taylor, the final victory at New Orleans had in that sense "enduring and massive consequences". It gave the Americans "continental predominance", while it left the indigenous nations dispossessed, powerless, and vulnerable.

"The Hunters of Kentucky" was a song written to commemorate Jackson's victory over the British at the Battle of New Orleans. In both 1824 and 1828 Jackson used the song as his campaign song during his presidential campaigns.

"Hunters of Kentucky" propagated various beliefs about the war. One of them was calling the Pennsylvania Rifle the Kentucky Rifle. Another was crediting the riflemen with the victory of the Battle of New Orleans, when it could be said it was Jackson's artillery that was actually responsible for the win. Finally, one stanza said that the British planned to ransack New Orleans, which was unlikely to happen.

In keeping with the idea of the conflict as a "second war of independence" against John Bull, the narrative of the skilled rifleman in the militia had parallels with that of the Minuteman as the key factor in winning against the British.

Somewhat ironically, the Kentucky militiamen were the worst equipped of Jackson's forces. Only a third were armed, lamented Jackson to Monroe. On top of this, they were poorly clothed, and were weakened from the long journey. (This explains their poor performance against Thornton's troops on the Right Bank, where they were quickly routed. A court of inquiry cleared Colonel Davis of blame. The outcome was not to the satisfaction of the Kentuckians. Two years later, an account was published in the Kentucky Reporter, that grossly exaggerated the Kentucky militia's resistance, whilst bringing into question the behavior of the Louisiana Militia and its commander.) Upon learning this, Jackson was purported to have quipped 'I never in my life seen a Kentuckian without a gun, a pack of cards, and a jug of whiskey.'

The author Augustus Caesar Buell had a book about Jackson published posthumously. It contains his argument that the effect of the artillery, relative to riflemen, was negligible. He 'provides the most authentic solution' by claiming to quote from a primary source document from a fictitious department of the British Army. He declared there were 3,000 men wounded or killed by rifle munitions, 326 by musket or artillery. The numbers provided run counter to those in primary sources with known provenance. Ritchie notes the British reserve was 650 yards away from the American line, so never came within rifle range, yet suffered 182 casualties. Owsley estimates that between 800 and 1200 privately owned rifles were used, with the majority of Jackson's men equipped with the musket.

Histories of the battle, in particular those directed towards a popular audience, have continued to emphasize the part played by the riflemen. In more recent years, starting with Brown in 1969, scholarship has revealed that the militia played a smaller role, and that most British casualties were attributed to artillery fire. The engineers who oversaw the erection of the ramparts, the enslaved persons of color who built them, and the trained gunners who manned the cannons have seen their contributions understated as a consequence of these popular histories that have been written since the Era of Good Feelings. Popular memory's omissions of the numerous artillery batteries, professionally designed earthworks, and the negligible effect of aimed rifle fire during that battle lulled those inhabitants of the South into believing that war against the North would be much easier than it really would be. Owsley notes that De Tousard was adamant that the artillery fire that broke the British, many of its gunners being of French extraction.

Until fairly recently, 'the supremacy of Kentucky and Tennessee rifles in deciding the battle was undisputed.' Whilst this is recognised in some contemporary sources as folklore, it is seen as an emblem of a bygone era in Kentucky. A bronze statue was dedicated in 2015 in honor of the local Soldier - Ephraim McLean Brank - who, as legend has it, was the "Kentucky rifleman" at the Battle of New Orleans. It is situated at Muhlenburg County Courthouse in Greenville, Kentucky. There are still those who are happy to read accounts of forefathers from their state, and how the 'long riflemen killed all of the officers ranked Captain and above in this battle.' Likewise, there are contemporary secondary sources that champion the riflemen as the cause of this significant victory against the British.

After the battle, a claim was published by George Poindexter, in a letter dated January 20 to the Mississippi Republican, that Pakenham's troops had used "Beauty and Booty" as a watchword:

The watch-word and countersign of the enemy on the morning of the 8th was,
BOOTY AND BEAUTY
Comment is unnecessary on these significant allusions held out to a licentious soldiery. Had victory declared on their side, the scenes of Havre de Grace, of Hampton, of Alexandria . . . would, without doubt, have been reacted at New Orleans, with all the unfeeling and brutal inhumanity of the savage foe with whom we are contending.

This was republished in Niles' Register, the National Intelligencer on February 13, and other newspapers. Whilst there were criticisms from the Federalist press, as well as from Poindexter's enemies, as to how reliable this information was, it was widely accepted elsewhere. Senator Charles Jared Ingersoll made direct reference to this in his speech to Congress on February 16, reproduced in full in the National Intelligencer. He continued, in an elated manner, 'with the tidings of this triumph from the south, to have peace from the east, is such a fullness of gratification as must overflow all hearts with gratitude.' He saw the news of victory at New Orleans against an immoral foe, followed by news of peace, as a positive sentiment to unite the different peoples of the United States, the zeitgeist of these postwar years later becoming known as the Era of Good Feelings.

This watchword claim, as originated by Poindexter, was repeated in Eaton's "Life of General Jackson", first published in 1817. A second edition of this biography was published in 1824, when Jackson made his first presidential bid. Further editions were published for the presidential elections of 1828 and 1833. Editions from 1824 onwards now contained the claim that documentary evidence proved the watchword was used. As a consequence it was reproduced in a travelogue in 1833.

Following the publishing of a travelogue in 1833, whereby the author James Stuart referred to the watchword, this hitherto unknown controversy became known in Great Britain. In response to the author, five British officers who had fought in the battle, Keane, Lambert, Thornton, Blakeney and Dickson, signed a rebuttal in August 1833. It is stated this was published in The Times by American sources, but this is not the case. Somewhat ironically, Niles's Register, which originally printed Poindexter's claim, now printed the British rebuttal:

We, the undersigned, serving in that army, and actually present, and through whom all orders to the troops were promulgated, do, in justice to the memory of that distinguished officer who commanded and led the attack, the whole tenor of whose life was marked by manliness of purpose and integrity of view, most unequivocally deny that any such promise (of plunder) was ever held out to the army, or that the watchword asserted to have been given out was ever issued. And, further, that such motives could never have actuated the man who, in the discharge of his duty to his king and country, so eminently upheld the character of a true British soldier.

James Stuart's account was criticised by a veteran, Major Norman Pringle, who wrote several letters to the Edinburgh Evening Courant. In response, Stuart published a book to refute these criticisms. He quoted Major Eaton as a reliable source, and later went on to comment that as a result of Stuart, it had become accepted the watchword was a falsehood. One quote from the book 'certainly the refutation of the charge as stated in Major Eaton's Book is, though tardy, complete' considered the matter closed. Notwithstanding the refutation, the story had benefited both Jackson and Eaton's political careers, who had nothing left to prove.

The publication of Eaton's book in Britain in 1834, and in subsequent editions, still contained the story of "booty and beauty". The British Ambassador, Sir Charles Richard Vaughan wrote to President Jackson about the matter. Vaughan wrote that Eaton 'expressed himself glad, that the report was at last contradicted' by the rebuttal, but there was no pressure on him to retract his comments from the Jackson biography. There is no recounting in 1833 of Jackson's supposed encounter with the mystery Creole planter (Denis de la Ronde), as reported by S C Arthur (see below).

Arthur's 1915 publication, quoting from Parton's 1861 biography of Jackson, itself quoting extensively from Vincent Nolte's book published in 1854, has referred to a Creole planter reportedly visited a British military camp a few days prior to the battle, being welcomed in after claiming that he was supportive of a possible British takeover of the region. While dining at dinner with a group of British officers, the planter claimed he heard one officer offer the toast of "Beauty and Booty". After gathering information on Pakenham's battle plans, the planter left the camp the next day and reported the information he had gathered to Jackson; the rumor that the British were offering toasts to "Beauty and Booty" soon spread throughout New Orleans, in particular among the upper-class women of the city. Nolte's book reveals the 'planter' to be no other than Denis de la Ronde, the colonel commanding the Third Regiment of the Louisiana Militia.

In the years since the Treaty of Ghent, not only did Jackson's reputation benefit from his major victory against the British, but also from vilifying the British as an amoral foe, against whom a second war of independence had been fought. As a national hero, it facilitated his subsequent career in politics, and tenure as President of the United States.

New England as a whole was against the war. The leaders of the Federalist Party of New England met at the Hartford Convention and decided to deliver a set of demands to the federal government in January 1815. The moderates were in charge and there was no proposal to secede from the union. When the Hartford delegation reached Washington word of the great American victory at New Orleans came and the Federalists were seen as traitors and anti-American; the Federalist Party was permanently ruined.

The economic impact of the War of 1812 resulted in discord for those in the northern New England states harmed by the blockade. Their concerns were voiced through the Federalist Party. The Hartford Convention saw them discuss their grievances concerning the ongoing war and the political problems arising from the federal government's increasing power. Federalists were increasingly opposed to slavery, both on principle and because the Three-fifths Compromise gave a political advantage to their opponents, who gained increased representation because of the weight given to enslaved (and therefore disenfranchised) people. This had resulted in the dominance of Virginia in the presidency since 1800.

By the time the Federalist "ambassadors" got to Washington, the war was over and news of Andrew Jackson's stunning victory in the Battle of New Orleans had raised American morale immensely. The "ambassadors" hastened back to Massachusetts, but not before they had done fatal damage to the Federalist Party. The Federalists were thereafter associated with the disloyalty and parochialism of the Hartford Convention and destroyed as a political force. Across the nation, Republicans used the great victory at New Orleans to ridicule the Federalists as cowards, defeatists and secessionists. Pamphlets, songs, newspaper editorials, speeches and entire plays on the Battle of New Orleans drove home the point.

The Era of Good Feelings resulted from the Battle of New Orleans. From 1815 to 1825 there was single-party rule in Washington and an overwhelming feeling of patriotism due to the extinction of the Federalist Party. The era saw the collapse of the Federalist Party and an end to the bitter partisan disputes between it and the dominant Democratic-Republican Party during the First Party System.

Andrew Jackson served as the seventh president of the United States from 1829 to 1837.

The void left by the Federalist Party was replaced by the Whig Party (United States), which came into being in 1833, in opposition to Andrew Jackson, and his policies as President. The Whig Party fell apart in the 1850s due to divisions over the expansion of slavery. Once more, a division between southern and northern states came into being.

The victory at New Orleans effectively kept the United States unified for the next 45 years until the American Civil War.

The Louisiana Historical Association dedicated its Memorial Hall facility to Jackson on January 8, 1891, the 76th anniversary of the Battle of New Orleans. The Federal government established a national historical park in 1907 to preserve the Chalmette Battlefield, which also includes the Chalmette National Cemetery. It features the 100-foot-tall Chalmette Monument and is part of the Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve. The monument was supposed to be at least 150 feet tall but the very soft and wet soil limited it to 100 feet. A five-cent stamp in 1965 commemorated the sesquicentennial of the Battle of New Orleans and 150 years of peace with Britain. The bicentennial was celebrated in 2015 with a Forever stamp depicting United States troops firing on British soldiers along Line Jackson.

Prior to the twentieth century the British government commonly commissioned and paid for statues of fallen generals and admirals during battles to be placed inside St Paul's Cathedral in London as a memorial to their sacrifices. Major Generals Pakenham and Gibbs were both memorialized in a statue at St Paul's that was sculpted by Sir Richard Westmacott.

• The Buccaneer, a 1938 American adventure film made by Cecil B. DeMille starring Fredric March, was based on Jean Lafitte and the Battle of New Orleans during the War of 1812.
• The Buccaneer, a 1958 pirate-war film starring Yul Brynner as Jean Lafitte and Charlton Heston as Andrew Jackson, is a fictionalization of the privateer Lafitte helping Jackson win the Battle of New Orleans.
• Johnny Horton's cover of the Jimmy Driftwood song The Battle of New Orleans, which describes the battle from the perspective of an American soldier, reached number 1 on the Billboard Hot 100 in 1959.

• List of War of 1812 battles
• Saint Malo, Louisiana

Notes

Citations