What if Virginia (and the rest of the Upper South) had not seceded?

[Frodo]

Let's suppose that Virginia, as well as North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas had not seceded from the Union in 1861, leaving the Deep South to fight it out as best they could against federal armies striving to reunite them -how would this have affected the resulting Civil War?  How would the outcome have been different?

[True Democrat]

With Lee in charge of the Union troops, I think the North would win by mid-1863 at the latest.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Slavery dies out in the 1880s.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I can't see this happening unless a Fort Sumter type incident can be avoided or South Carolina attacks Fort Moultrie before Anderson makes his move to Sumter.  In the former case, we might not get a war at all, and in the latter, even some of the Deep South States might not secede.

[bullmoose88]

The North would certainly have more difficulty turning foreign opinion away from the South without the War on Slavery option. Its much harder for the Union to make that claim when it has 8 rather than 4 slave states on its side.

Perhaps Britain and France intervene on the side of the South, diplomatically or otherwise.

[12th Doctor]

With Lee in charge of the Union troops, I think the North would win by mid-1863 at the latest.

I think you are being far too generous.  The middle of 1862 at the latest.

Slavery dies out in the 1880s.

Agreed

The North would certainly have more difficulty turning foreign opinion away from the South without the War on Slavery option. Its much harder for the Union to make that claim when it has 8 rather than 4 slave states on its side.

Perhaps Britain and France intervene on the side of the South, diplomatically or otherwise.

You seem to forget that the real France and Britain didn't make the final decision against the South until probably early 1863.  The war wouldn't have lasted that long... if it had the "Confederacy" would have been nothing more than a few unorganized isolated pockets of resistance.

[minionofmidas]

With Lee in charge of the Union troops, I think the North would win by mid-1863 at the latest.

I think you are being far too generous.  The middle of 1862 at the latest.

How does the spring of 1861 sound?

[The Man From G.O.P.]

You'd have a large bloc of states that while still in the Union would have nothing of Federal troops marhing thru thier states to attack the deep south, probably leading to them seceeding anyway.

[True Democrat]

You'd have a large bloc of states that while still in the Union would have nothing of Federal troops marhing thru thier states to attack the deep south, probably leading to them seceeding anyway.

It is possible that the federal troops may be able to go through Missouri, Kansas, and Indian Territoriy, but unlikely.  However, if a certain number of officers and percentage of troops were offered to the South, I think they might go for it.

[Dr. Cynic]

Lee told Scott he would not invade his beloved Virginia... Scott retorted he had made the "Greatest mistake of his life."

It would've basically come down to Scott in charge with Lee as his lieutenant. Scott would feign off a field command and Lincoln would have to give the command to Lee... With the Union's proper equipment, manpower, and better trained troops, Lee could've defeated the South very quickly.

No one would've heard of Grant for certain... Lee would've probably ended up President at some point... Who knows...

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

It would've basically come down to Scott in charge with Lee as his lieutenant. Scott would feign off a field command and Lincoln would have to give the command to Lee... With the Union's proper equipment, manpower, and better trained troops, Lee could've defeated the South very quickly.

The Confederacy would still have had the initial advantage in training.  I doubt if Lee would have been able to do anything to change the policy that caused the regulars to not be distributed among the volunteer troops.  Also if Virginia did not secede, it probably would have pursued a strategy of neutrality in 1861 as did Kentucky in OTL.

[??????????]

I doubt the CSA would have been as well organized as it was with the upper south. Virginia was really the "glue" that stuck the confederacy together in regards to railroads, armaments, clothing and food from the Shenandoah valley. If Sumter had happened and Lee led the Yankee armies the war would have been over by June 1862 at the latest.

[J. J.]

I'm picturing what would have happened if the troops of Virginia were now fighting for the Union.  1862, Lee marches from Milledgeville to Atlanta, possibly meeting up with Thomas.  It's over.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

The war would've ended by July, 1862 at the latest.  The South's only advantage really was the superior command, and with Lee, Jackson, etc. not on the Southern side, the South would have been doomed.

[LelMate155]

War ends in Late 1862, probably Alabama is still the last confederate state to surrender

[Blue3]

The 13th amendment only passed due to the absence of the Southern states' representatives in Congress, right?

[White Trash]

The Upper South was the only part of the Confederacy with any semblance of industry and a decent stock of federal munitions. Without the Upper South, the Confederacy would've been unable to arm, clothe and supply their meager army for long. And while others have said that 1862 would've been the breaking point, it's likely that single Manassas type engagement in the summer of 1861 would've been enough to defeat the Confederates.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The 13th amendment only passed due to the absence of the Southern states' representatives in Congress, right?

Yes, but with the Republican slates that the South would elect under Reconstruction, even if the requirement had been two-thirds of the whole number instead of two-thirds of those present, the 13th would have been delayed only a few years.  The only way the South could realistically have prevented the 13th Amendment would have been to not seceded in the first place.