Talk Elections

What if the Confederates won the war?  What would election maps look like?

Depends.  Did they win with enough strength to claim the border states?  Did they only keep their independence?

Well in the CSA, I could see Conservatives vs Rural Populist with a small Socialist Party (based on the support of urban organised labour).

In the North the Democrats would probably have evolved in a leftward direction (as they did) into a populist party with rural western support and urban blue collar support) mean while the Republican would have been the pro-business and nationalist party (as they where) with strong support in the far west and south west, New England and the MidAtlantic states but party identification would have had less to do with geography and more to do with social status…

The USA (1880’s)…

Blue = Republican leaning areas

Red = Democrat leaning areas

Green = Confederate States of America  

()      

The CSA (1880’s)…

Red = Populist Party leaning states

Blue = Conservative Party leaning states

Green = United States of America

()            

A lot would depend upon the circumstances of their leaving.  If the seven original seceders had been allowed to depart in peace, then that would have been the extent of it. By 1870, a gradual compensated emancipation would have been in place in the United States.  By 1880, if the seven departed states tried to gain readmittance, they would be rebuffed, as the United States would not want them, not because of slavery, but because of all the negros (to use the politer term in place of the one that would have been actually used).  This also helps to explain why we didn't annex Cuba at the end of the Spanish-American War.  The CSA would basically be equivalent to Jamaica or Mexico by 2000 in terms of economics and the sucking sound that a Perot-like anti NAFTA character would have referred to would have been of jobs going to the CSA.

As for the South winning an actual war of Independence, I just don't see it happening.

Here's an 1876 map of mine own:
()
Blue = USA - Free states
Grey = USA - Gradual Emancipation states
Red = USA - Slave states
Green - CSA - Slave states

New Jersey is not a mistake.  This was the status of New Jersey as of the Civil War,  and there were still a few slaves there in 1860, but its gradual emancipation had been going on so long that it was effectively a free state in all but name.

West Virginia is also not a mistake. There were greivances between East and West Virginia besides the slavery issue and it is entirely feasible that the spilt woud have occurred even without the Civil War, altho the boundary would be different, probably includung Danville in WV while Harper's Ferry would have remained in VA, if a split occurred.

Why in the world would Arkansas be in the union? Also, Maryland would have gone to the Confederacy as well.

Not Maryland. Only if the CSA Army had been able to capture Anapolis or Baltimore. The Maryland Assembly voted on session in December 1861, andit was voted down.

Arkansas was one of the four states to secede after Fort Sumter.  The others were TN, NC, and VA.

Baltimore wouldn't have needed to be captured. It was VERY confederate friendly. And actually Maryland voted not to vote on secession.

The Battle of Antitem came because of Lee's plan to get Maryland in the CSA.

And? That does not mean the majority of Maryland was against the south or secession. Well it IS a part of the south so I guess it can't be against itself. lol

Do you think that if the Confederates had won, they would've taken parts of Mexico?

Yes. And Cuba. Google "Knights of the Gold Circle".

Arkansas, like the other upper south states the seceded had a slave population that was approximately one quarter of the whole polulation.  UNlike them, it contained a significant amount of unsettled territory that was not suited for plantation agriculture, so I feel that if the upper south states had remained in the union, it would have been the first to consider gradual emancipation.

They might have wanted Cuba, but I don't think that they could have taken it from Spain.  Mexico would have had to wait until Maximillian was gone and I think that the Union would certainly have given Mexico enough support to defend itself.  The CSA would want such territory, but it would not have been able to gain it by either force or persuasion.

It's all speculation really. If the war had ended in 1862 then it would have been perfectly feasible because the CSA had a somewhat "working" navy and a decently supplied army. If the south had won in 1865 (Due to Lincoln losing the election or being killed by Booth, when he should have done it) then I would say it wouldn't have been feasible. What killed the south, and I repeat myself again, were the lack of railroads, plain and simple. The North had punished the south economically so bad before the war that it crippled the south. Also Ernest, I do see you are from the greatest state in the south. ;) Ever been to Sumter?

The reason I think Maryland would not join the CSA was because the peopke of Maryland just didn't want to. If you remember right, in 1862 while invading Maryland Lee's Army of Northern Virginia played "Oh Maryland, My Maryland" to try to start a revolt. The tactic did not work, but backfired as the CSA playing the state's anthem angered many citizens of the state. Tactic kind of backfired, didn't it Marse Lee? :)

That was western Maryland. It was a heavy germanic area that was fiercly unionist. Eastern Maryland consisted of mostly old timer families who have lived their since the 1600s and were fiercly southern in their ideals.

The Confederates should not have had a problem buying chunks of Mexico from Max. And Cuba would have been realtively easy to take from a decrepit Spain.

Has anyone here taken my suggestion and googled "Knights of the Golden Circle". Very interesting!

Yes, I've been to Sumter several times.  However, I'm fairly netural when it comes to the Second American Revolution, perhaps because my paternal ancestors were in Canada at the time, their ancestors having moved there after ending up on the losing side of the First American Revolution.  :)  (I was born in the Sunshine state, tho.)

I can't see the war ending in 1862 with a Confederate victory, not with Lincoln as President.  The only realistic chance the south had of winning in 1862 was if there was British recognition, and the only way that could have happened would have been with a Union President who was politically inept enough to let the Trent affair get out of hand.  Say what you will about Lincoln, he was not politically inept, especially to that degree.

If Lee had pushed the advantage at Second Manassas and had crushed the Federal Army at Chantilly the road to DC would have been wide open. Also, if the special orders hadn't been lost Lee would have done a LOT more damage then he did. I believe that Britian was about to recognize the CSA. But do I believe that would have been a good thing? Absolutely not. I believe they would have taken upon our mutual weakness and retaken the colonies. They still did drool over us at that point.

At most Lee would have gotten to the outskirts of Washington, to the forts manned by the Heavy Artillery units.  The idea that the Army of Northern Virginia could have taken Washington, DC in 1862 is pure fantasy.  Just as Richmond took a long seige to take, so would have Washington, and the Confederate Army could never have won on a protracted seige because the Union reserves would be mobilzed to break it before it could succeed.  Lee's retreat sfter his invasion would always provide the situation for Lincoln to announce the Emancipation Proclaimation and once that Proclaimation was received in London, any chance that London would recognize the CSA before Washington did was gone.

And that's the only reason why it was announced because the E.P. didn't actually free any slaves.

Lee’s Biographer Douglas Southall Freeman said that Lee’s greatest chance to destroy completely a Union Army came in the Battle of the Seven Days. At Glendale Lee had already mauled the Union Army of the Potomac and sent it reeling back from the gates of Richmond, “Stonewall” Jackson’s “Army of the Valley” had finally arrived and now moved to facing the weak Federal right flank which was accorded along an area of swamp land, the next day Lee ordered classic double envelopment with James Longstreet’s Corps attacking from the South against the Federal Left and Jackson from the North against the Federal Right, the Federal Commander George B McClellan had abandoned the field and fled back to his headquarters on the banks of the James during the night and the Army of the Potomac lacked any leadership with Divisional commanders largely left to fend for themselves, Longstreet’s attack went well but for some reason Jackson’s attack never materialised and Longstreet was forced to end his own attacks, the reason for Jackson’s tardiness at Glendale can largely be attributed to exhaustion he had been deprived of any real rest for weeks and at the same time had lead perhaps the finest campaign of the civil war (“the Valley Campaign” of 1862), so suppose that Jackson gets some rest and attacks?

()  



Jackson’s Corps smashes through the Federal Right flank and soon after Longstreet does likewise on the Federal Left, with both Federal flanks torn away it is left to every divisional commander to get out as best they can, the only two who might have achieved this would have been Joseph Hooker who was commanding a division slightly to the South and Phil Kearny who was perhaps the finest commander in the Army of the Potomac at the time (he was later killed at Canntily during the Federal retreat from Second Manassas.

Such a victory would have rendered 2/3rds of the Federal Army destroyed and the Federal Base at Harrison’s landing vulnerable, Lee would probably have easily seized the Federal base along with McClellan’s vast artillery train (which had been intended to reduce the fortifications of Richmond), Kearny and Hooker may have been able to withdraw their troops leaving either French or Sumner to either surrender Harrison’s landing or die defending it, but still that would leave but 20,000 men with little heavy equipment of over 120,000 men who had landed there at the beginning of the campaign. Lee would have moved North. John Pope may still have taken his patchwork command of the “Army of Virginia” out to meet Lee and would have been soundly beaten in fact with a probably noticeably smaller command Pope may well have been completely annihilated by Lee in the area around Manassas leaving only very limited Federal forces within the City of Washington with freshly raised troops forming the bulk, in such a situation Lee could have invaded the North as Braxton Bragg and Kirby Smith invaded Kentucky in Maryland he would have found little to stop him, with either Hooker or Kearny in command of the forces in Washington they would have realised that a force of what would have been about 40,000  could not hope to smash Lee and would have urged that  Union forces from secondary theatre such as South Carolina, North Carolina and perhaps even Louisiana be transported to Washington to reform a credible Army this would have left ports such as Charleston, Williamsport, Savannah, Mobile and even perhaps New Orleans under far less pressure and possibly permitting far more foreign aid to the South to enter the CSA, While at the same time confederate forces from these areas could be moved to Kentucky or Maryland, with Lee free to exploit the rich farmland of Pennsylvania and Maryland and with the likelihood that on entering the Pro-Southern East of the Maryland his Army would have been reinforced with new recruits while at the same time receiving men from along the Eastern Sea Board who had been freed thanks to the Union withdraw from these areas. In Kentucky with Lee dominating the Eastern theatre and reinforcements coming in all the time Bragg and Smith would probably have been emboldened to continue their offensive after the indecisive battle of Perryville and would probably have been able to compel General Buell to withdraw back into the fortifications of Louisville while Bragg’s plans for installing a confederate government in Kentucky to raise troops could have gone a head and within a mouth or so may have furnished the Confederate Army of Tennessee with an additional 5,000 or so men as could well have been the case with Lee in Maryland.

With the Confederates dominating both East and West and only Rosecrans and Grant holding their own at Corinth Mississippi against the Confederate General Van Dorn it is likely the English government (PM Palmerston had said after second Manassas that a second Confederate victory would compel Britain to recognise the South and France was already at this stage very eager to do so), Lincoln faced with the Royal Navy breaking up the Union blockade and with the threat of a British army in Canada (which including Militia number 110,000 men, spread wide but still a powerful force if concentrated) would have been forced to “acquiesce to the good entreaties of the European power” and may well have resigned leaving Hannibal Hamlin to suffer the repercussions of  a treaty with the south which may well have left Eastern Maryland as part of the CSA (the western part of the state remaining in Federal hands and providing a corridor of land around washing DC itself) and Kentucky (or at least the greater part of it) under confederate control). Within a decade or so the Economic ties that would have grown between North and South would have trumped any lingering hostility and while their may have been a friendly rivalry and some suspicion (with the CSA probably unabashedly allied with France and England) relations would not have been very bad between the two nations. However Slavery (Which would probably have come ot a slow end between the late 1880’s and mid 1910’s) would have been a bone of contention.                

If Jackson gets the rest he needs, when does he have time to launch the attack?

In the event of a complete federal collapse on the pennisula, there is no way that Lincoln would have let Pope take the Army of Virginia out of the Washington defenses.  If Lincoln had a fault in this war, it was that he was overly protective of Washington, but with good reason.  Also Lee would not have captured the artillery train intact, altho the Union could have been compelled to destroy it to prevent its capture.  Yes, Lee could have conducted a raid into the north, but his own supply situation could not have allowed him to hold territory there. Lack of ammunition would compel him to return south of the Potomac and he could not have carried off much in the way of other supplies with his army.

Finally, what does recognition gain the CSA?  Not much.  Neither England or France would have actually gone to war over cotton.  It would have made it easier for the CSA to buy naval raiders from the Liverpool shipyards, but the ones they did buy were enough to force most of the US merchant fleet to fly to other flags.  Before the Civil War the US merchant fleet was the largest in the world.  It never recovered that lost position after the War.

The CS Navy sunk more tonnage per ship then any other navy in modern history.

There is no dobut the CSA could have won the war at a number of points, but they would have done with a decivise victory where the "Army of the Potomac" was  totally destroyed, and a tactical victory that Lee gained at "2nd Bull Run", or Chancellorsville, or a defensive victory such as Fredricksburg.
The places where Lee could have destroyed the Union forces are quite various:
1) During the 7 days campaign as already described .
2) A complete win at "2nd Bull Run".
3) The "Lost Order " isnt lost.
4) Jackson isnt killed at Chancellorsville, and Stonewall reaches the US Mine Ford(a road to which he was looking for when he was shot by his own men).
5) Gettysburg.
As for what the CSA would have looked like I think it would had for certain the following states:
1) Alabama
2) Arkansas
3) Florida
4) Georgia
5) Louisinia
6) Mississippi
7) North Carolina
8) South Carolina
9) Tennessee
10) Texas
11) Virginia
States I think would have joined the CSA.
1) Kentucky.
States that could have been divided between USA & CSA.
2) Missouri & Maryland.
Southern Missouri was very pro-CSA. As was parts of Maryland.
Territory that would have gone to the CSA.
1) The Indian Territory.(The current state of Oklahoma)
Territory that CSA might have got.
1) New Mexico Territory. (The current two states of New Mexico and Arizona).
Also Cuba I think would have gone to the CSA, and also to help bail out Emperor Max in Mexico the CSA might have gotten Territory there namely the states of Chinuahua and Sonora.

                                                                                                                                                                               

If Jackson rests what does the Union army do durign that time?  Withdraw to better ground and entrench, and more support comes up.

Gettysburg was a chance to defeat a Union army, but Lee never came close.  A lot of people say if he had put  2 more divisions into Pickett's Charge it would have worked.  Well, it would have broken the center, but the Union flanks would have collapsed on the breakthrough before it could be solidified since there would be no one locking them into place, which the 2 other divisions were doing in real life.

In 1862 Ohio Copperhead Clement Valandigam was banished to the Confederacy by order of President Lincoln. The Democrats in Ohio nominated him for Governor anyway.

The CSA could not win the war on the battlefield by 1862.  It had to win it by making the North feel that it was not worth continuing.  A single decisive battlefield victory that annihilated a Union army would not have done it.  Northern political resolve showed many times that it could rebound from despair caused by temporary Confederate high tides.  Making those tides higher would not have affected the ultimate outcome of the war.  You need to either have the Confederates take Washington in 1861 or have a different Republican win the presidency in 1860 to have any reasonable chance of Confederate independence.

The only way New Mexico would have ended up in Confederate hands would have been it Sibley hadn't been a damn fool and left his supply train unprotected at Glorieta.  If he hadn't, the Confederates may have even invaded Colorado.

Northern political resolve was sliping quite a bit.  It didn't really strengthen until after the Amancipation Proclimation, yeah, I know, my spelling is terrible.  I think that a decisive victory on PA soil in 1862, along with Bragg capturing Louisville would have tipped it.  You must remember, too, that European involvement was very likely before the AP.


I would contend that the Confederates could have one the war as late as 1864, but thier country would have been a disater and they would have lost Tennessee and and hope of getting Kentucky and the Indian Territory.

I agree that a decisve victory in which the main Union army is destroyed would have ended the war in the CSA favour. A win in Maryland or Penn in 1862 would have seen the French and British force a peace settlement.
A victory at Gettysburg was possable but not on the 3rd day with Picketts charge, that was always going to fail.
The best hope for Lee to win was on the 2nd day, by taking Little Round Top and outflanking the whole Union line, and dont forget that it was race for the Union to get troops on to that hill, and the race was won only by 10 minutes. If Warren had not spotted the weakness just say 5 minutes the battle could have well be a lot different.

Gettysburg was winnable on day 1, but that was a long shot.  The belief that the Confederates could have easily taken the heights is unfounded.

Little Round Top was a close run, but would not have been a nail in the coffin.  The Union lines would have to put a barb on the fishook, but both sides would have been overstretched.  The forces on Little Round Top would have been vulnerable to being cut off from supply by a clever counter attack on their supply lines.  Could have gone either way.

A war ending Confederate victory at Gettysburg was not possible.  Once Ewell made the decision not to attack the hieghts on Day 1, the Confederates lost thier chance.  The ANV would not have won the second day with out Pickett's division, plain and simple.  If Pickett would have arrived a day early and been part of the second day's attack, then the CSA would have met success.  But, that was quite impossible.

What I mean when I say the Confederate could not have one a war ending victory at Gettysburg is that, even if they had won on the first day, the Federal Army would have retreated back to Pipe Creek, per Meade's General Order #1.  So, if the Confederates had won, the decisive battle would have been fought else where.

Stonewall Jackson would had taken Culips Hill, he wouldnbt had stopped like Ewell, but again Gettysburg would have been a CSA win but NOT a decisive win in which the "Army of the Potomac" is destroyed.
What-if Hooker was still in control after all he was only sacked two days before the battle.

Wouldn't have mattered much, because Hancock was the de facto commander anyway.  Meade was rather inconsequential.

I agree Hancock did a lot to win the battle, also here is another what-if , What-if John Reynolds was not killed on the 1st day- would he if he been alive on the 3rd day forced Meade into a counter-attack that could well have destroyed Lee. Hancock pushed for it- but Meade said no- but with Reynolds pushing for it as well he might have changed his mind.
I do think the CSA could have won the war of that there is no dobut, it is just where and when?

2nd Bull Run/Manassas was the last real chance.  Once the Emancipation Procolation was in place Britain would be hard pressed to support the slave holding south.

A French/British declaration of war would have been a disaster, for the South.  Draft riots would have ended in about 15 minutes.   The papers would hve screamed the secession and war was a foreign plot to divide the nation.

They would have likely opened up trade to the Confederacy lifting the blockade and would have tried a raid on either DC or NY.  This would have taught them a very harsh lesson: Never send a blue water navy up against a brown water navy in brown water.  The Royal Navy would be deprived of its biggest advantages and fight a force equal in size in the oppositions home waters.  The RN was good, but not that good.

After that it comes down to what the RN does, supply the Suoth or Canada.  If they supply the South, the Union can maintain a defensiv position while picking apart Canada.  If they supply Canada the South is overwhelemd byt he much larger Union army and the US and UK sign a white peace after a while.

Even if the RN contents itself with lifting the blockade the Union will be able to raise troops and keep them supplied far easier than the South.



France, at this point, was a non factor.  They could barely hold Mexico, let alone intervene north of the border.

Force?  It may well have brought about official recignition for the CSA, but there is no way either would jave been willing to go to war, especially since before they could consider it, the Emancipation Proclaimation would have been made.  Britain needed Northern corn far more than it needed Southern cotton.  Aside from making the naval war a bit more difficult for the Union, foreign recognition would not have gained the Confederacy anything.  If they had gone to war, well, our flag would have a few more stars on it than iyt currently does, depending upon how British North America was split up into states.  (Might have also added part of the Empire of Mexico depending upon how acquisitive we felt like being.)  The Union never did fully mobilize for war in the Civil War, it never needed to.

I think that the Confederates' main plan by 1864 was to just hold out until the presidential election when Lincoon would be gone and some Peace Democrats would step into the White House, and give Jeff Davis and Confederates freedom from the Union.

Noooo.  War Weariness equals Linocoln getting voted out.  This notion that the North was massively united behind the war is just a fairl-tale taught to make the north look all good and the south look all bad.  There were draft riots and papers that were harshly critical of Lincoln, anti-war demonstrations and other things in the north through out the war.

A bit more war weariness and there might have been a few more states run like Indiana, but unless Southern Arnies could stay in Kentucky or  Pennsylvania instead of merely making raids into them, it wouldn't amount to enough to cause the war to be lost. The South did not have the logistical capability to do maintain large armies in the field far from the railroads.

I know all about that, and it was a piss-poor strategy.   The North was not united, but the chance of it flying apart was slim to none.  

Just look at teh result of the 1864 election: Lincoln won the popular vote by a hair over 10%.  There were many people against the war, but not nearly enough to for ce Lincoln's hand.  Once the Confederacy failed to threaten Washington D.C. after 2nd BUll Run and Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclomation the war became more popular in many areas of society.

The war weariness "strategy" was really a desperate last prayer after the failure of Gettysburg and Vicksburg.  They hoped that if they could hold out maybe the North would abandon the war effort.  By then it was far too late.

McClellan believed that he was massively out numbered by the south and a lot of people believed him.  Add that onto the people who were against the war.  Then consider that Lee had no intention to simply raid the north, he intended to defeat the Union army decisively and capture Baltimore or Philadelphia.

Good to see someone remembers the New Mexico Campaign! :) Sibley was pushing his luck in any event - Canby (sp?) still held Fort Craig along his supply line/return route along the Rio Grande to the south, the Colorado forces were still intact after Glorieta and could fall back on Fort Union, and let's not forget the Californians making their way east toward El Paso, or the Missouri/Kansas forces being assembled to head to New Mexico. Even if they had managed to protect their supply train (holding all of Sibley's booze ;) ), they were in a precarious position. And let's not forget that Canby's forces had already moved north through the Sandia Mountain chain to link up with the Colorado forces - which they accomplished shortly after Glorieta, and which gave them parity or better with Sibley's army.

The Rebs were too ambitious out there - if they had focused on holding the pro-Confederate southern swath of the New Mexico Territory ("Confederate Arizona" split the New Mexico Territory along an east-west line, NOT the north-south boundary of today) and had made it a point to force the surrender of Canby's forces at Fort Craig after the Battle of Valverde instead of moving past them, then maybe they could have held Confederate Arizona.

The Southwest and the Pacific Coast were more ambivalent than dedicated to one side - there was talk of creating a 'Western Republic' out there!

Yep, I know all about this - I did an 84-page research paper on this in college... :D

The souths failure points and this is the last time I repost this. :)

1) Lees' lost orders being found.
2) Failure to take advantage of the Second Manassas Union collapse. They could have devastated the AoP at Chantilly.
3) The failure to entrap the Union army against the Rappahanock at Chancerlorsville. They DID have the ability to do that.
4) JEB Stuarts failure to re-unite with the Confederate Army early on the 1st day of Gettysburg. Although it would have not been a deciding victory for the CSA it would have been a humiliation to be beat on "home territory".
5) The Confederate Government had plenty of food and supplies to feed and clothe the army (unlike what school books tell you). The failure was Georgia and North Carolina protesting sending the supplies (extreme states rights) and the deterioration of the internal railroads.
6) Complete lack of any (successful)fight by the western armies.
7) The death blow for the confederate army will come as a shock to some here. The Battle of Five Forks. Yes Yes I know it happened in April '65 but the Confederate lines were actually holding up well and a organized retreat was in the works. The collapse of this critical juncture doomed the Confederacy. (Thanks to a shad bake)

Other minor failures :
a) C.S.S. Hunley
b) Failure to make use of the advantage the CSS Virginia had on the first day.
c) Shiloh
d) <sigh> Jefferson C Davis and his failure to form a cooperative bond with generals other then Lee.

The west lost the south the war.

1- Not a war loser, but it killed their chances for a while.
2- Very likely.  Definitely the best chance.
3- Possible, but not a given.  Probably not a war winning moment though.
4- Likely result is the Union pulls back and seeks battle elsewhere.
5- Yes, the Confederate government was a nightmare.  I'm half convinced NC was intentionally sabotaging the war effort.
6- A huge problem.  They always thought  the west was a diversion and never realized the importance of the Mississippi river.
7- All this really did is end the war a few years early, but this was the final nail in the coffin.  It removed the last fighting chance they had to try and come back.

Agree completely withthe rest of your points.

That's a negative.  Pope's command was not the Army of the Potomac, it was the Army of Virginia, a smaller command of about 50,000 men.  Lee's whole objective in fighting Second Manassas was to annihilate Pope's command before it could link up with the 90,000 man Army of the Potomac which was still in Washington.  McClellan was still in command.  They teach in school, however, that McClellan was relived in favor of Pope and then McClellan came back, because that is easier to understand, though quite inaccurate.

Ehhh, I would say that the Confederates last chance to win the war was the Battle of North Anna.  If they had carried out Lee's plans and sucessfully split the Federals into two groups and fought them while they were deployed piecemeal, they could have won an astunding victory against Grant just before the election.

Sorry my memory is getting rusty. sigh You are correct. :)

Quite alright ol' chum.  :)

Yep! Rock Creek running along the MD/PA border.

North Anna would have turned the Union back for a while.  Lee would have had to avoid conflict with the resurgent Union over the coming months as the next wave of enlistments arrived.

Sorry to contradict you again, but I thought that Meade's Orders were to pull back to Pipe Creek.

Grant's forces were already wearing thin.  At Cold Harbor (just after North Anna) they already had to pluck the "Band-box" regiments from D.C.

I believe it was actually both.

But the next wave of draftees were due soon, as in a matter of weeks.  That is why Lee felt the need to strike, the Union was going to get stronger while Lee was looking at no more reinforcements, the Confederacy was nearly bled white.

(shrug) probably.   Funny thing, I bet if newbies stumbled into here, they would think that we must be 3 Ph.D's talking.  :)

Oh, of course.  But in real life, when they came, Grant was very lucky, because they were settling down and they wouldn't have to march or perform any complex manuvers.  In the open field, Lee could have taken advantage of these gree units.

You're not?


Seriously, we are far too brief for Ph.Ds.

hahaha  Your such a comedian.  :)

True, that just means we acctually know what we are talking about, though.

Grant would have had to pull back to them, but Lee would not have risked crossing into the North again.  

True, but we must also ponder what the casulty figures would have been for the Federals if Lee had been sucessful at North Anna.  We are talking about the possible destruction of an entire Corps (V).  The would have devistated the Federal command as that was nearly a quarter of the AoP.  If that had happened, Grant would almost certainly have had to retreat north to protect his supply train, which was already percariously possitioned.  If you recall, Grant had moved it into a vulnerable possition to draw Lee out of Cold Harbor.  Lee didn't take the bait, but Grant would have been in a very uncomfortable possition had Lee won.

The reason I say Rock creek is because I know someone that lives on the banks and a sign is up by their house that says it's was a fallback point. And if you want to see Civil War History look at my wifes family tree!! Good grief she has almost 70 CSA ancestors. Trederick what part of NC are you from? My wifes family is from the Wilson area. Waddells and Jones (which one? lol). They are tobacco farmers, though not so much anymore. One of her ancestors owned almost 800 slaves in the Orangeburg district of SC.

This is the civil war, whole Coprps do not go away that quickly.  He could have devastated the Corp, but 60-70% would have gotten away.  They did have an avenue of retreat, but would have been cut of ffromt the main line.  Would still have been a heavy blow.

Casualties would have likely been 20-30% for the Federals, massive but not enough to disintegrate the force.

It is also possible the men would have failed Lee.  The southerners were not well drilled and the complex plan might have fallen apart, it happened more than once to the Cnfederates.

I disagree. Both sides were equally drilled. The problem was the flow of new recruits on both sides caused discipline problems. Gilliams tactics were FAR superior to Hardees (what a lousy book). I have read both and they are very interesting.

I'm sure that I mentioned this before, but my family comes from Washington, NC and the surrounding area.  The Rumley's and the Hall's sent 31 boys off to war, only three came back without being at least severely wounded.

Well, thats what I meant when I said "destroyed".  But you also asume that they would have been able to preserve order and make an orderly retreat, I doubt that.  Civil War Units did not react well in general when they were nearly totally cut-off.  Pandamonium would have ensued.  Federal soldier would have disgarded much of their arms and equipment to swim accross the river.  After such an event, I think that only about 40% of those who went into battle would have been ready to fight the next day or even the next week (or of course, never again for those killed, wounded or captured).

Hardee would have done a better job than Hood, whether his book sucks or not.

For one thing, I doubt that Hardee would have got half the Confederate command killed in one battle and for another, Hardee wouldn't have been stoned out on opium half the time.

Originally from Long Island, currently living in Raleigh.

All of my family came over post civil war.

:o :o :o :o


:( :( :( :(

Was Hood stoned on Opium? I suppose his doctors gave it to him for the constant pain he was in due to his amputated leg and arm... quite a tragic figure Hood, great Divisional comander, middling Corps commander, and indecisive and unlucky Army Commander, its actually amazing how close Hood got to destroying Schofield's Army prior to Franklin and then Thomas would have been greatly outnumbered at Nashville...

I would say Johnston should have remained in command at Atlanta his conduct during seven pines in 1862 was exemplary and had he not been wounded (when Lee took over) while he would not have demonstrated the brilliance of Lee he would probably have pushed the Federals back and then taken a defensive stand behind the Rappahannock near Fredericksburg... but perhaps Jefferson Davis' worst decision during his presidency was to remove Johnston from command of the Confederate Armies defending Atlanta, had he remained in command he planed for a series of counter attacks, that unlike Hoods may well have been better coordinated that might well have mauled Sherman's army a little and left it weakened, while a siege would still be likely it is also probable that the siege would have lasted longer and the Confederate Armies would have been in far better shape than they where after Ezra Church and so able to resist Sherman’s’ flanking of the City in September...    

As for Hardee he was a good, solid Corps commander, however at Missionary Ridge he really fowled up the deployment of his Corps, but that aside he was a capable and reliable, Pat Cleburne should most defiantly have received Corps command in the Army of Tennessee (which in saved from destruction on more than one occasion) he was also a good friend of Hardee (did he not marry Hardee’s daughter?) and trusted by his Corps commander implicitly, instead Hood advanced to Corps command, and while Polk was not as bad as many like to argue, Hood did not balance the command of the army and in fact wrecked a number of Johnston’s planned attacks during the Atlanta campaign.  

I always thought Johnston to be a really great person as well as a capable commander, at Sherman’s funeral he was a pawl bearing and, despite being in his 80’s, when it began to pour with rain he refused to put his hat on when friends insisted that he should saying, “where Sherman in my place and I in his he would not put on his hat” he then died shortly after from pneumonia.                

()

Joe Johnston and PGT Beauregard. What a duo! Davis did not like either, what a fool he was.

wow, I thought i knew a lot about the civil war {much more than my schoolmates}, but I know very little compared to yall  :)

I know very little. The civil war is a ongoing study.

Neither where geniuses, of the standard of say Forest, Jackson or Lee  and on the Federal side Grant and Sherman... But Johnson's actions during the Seven Pines, the Atlanta Campaign and the Bentonville Campaign show that he was indeed a gifted commander while Beauregard is often dismissed as a vain and untalented commander his defence of the port of Charleston from a massive Union Army and even his rescuing of the Army of the Mississippi after the battle of Shiloh show that while he was certainly moody and vain he was also a capable commander.  


In addition he did have a good grasp of “grand strategy” and while at times his recommendations may have been derided as fanciful, with hindsight many where in fact fairly reasonable, at least in their essence and such a broad outlook was something that Lee in particular certainly lacked, sadly.    

Can someone tell me how to create and post maps on this forum?

You can create maps through Paint on your computer. You have to have a website or have someone you know host the picture for you. Check out www.freewebs.com that's who I use. Once you upload a picture or want to use a picture from any site this is how you post it here..

1) Right click over the picture
2) Go down to properties
3) Highlight the section that says Address
4) Click Copy
5) Go to the normal post reply, click paste.
6) Around the link put the following [ img ]  and at the end of the link put this [ /img ]. Except you need to close the [] against the phrase img.

Thank you. I'll give it a try.