No Harper's Ferry 1859

If John Brown had not attempted his slave revolt, how would history have changed? Could this lower feelings enough to let John C. Breckinridge squeeze through in 1860, especially if we can avoid the third parties? What kind of a president would he have made? Would we just have the war a few years later?

I'd think there would still be a war later on... by 1859, north and south had diverged so much that a war was about inevitable, assuming that the north would still take the position that secession was illegal. Brown's raid just crystallized opinions that were already there. How are you thinking that no raid would affect the elections?

I doubt that no Harper's Ferry would have caused a Republican defeat. Assuming- which I do NOT - that the Democrats stayed together that would not save them.

Lincoln won MAJORITIES of the popular vote in states which together has MAJORITY of the electoral college.

In most states where slavery was lawful in 1860 Lincoln got almost no votes and I do not think he appeared on the ballot, I suspect it would have been less than safe for a white guy to campaign for Republican in say Mississippi and South Carolina- perhaps other places.


On the other hand I wonder whether Harper's Ferry was crucial in allowing for Sessession. Might sessession have been limited to 2 of 3 states and fizzled out?

If there's no Harper's Ferry raid, John Brown is still out there plotting and planning.

The Harper's Ferry attack was part of a plan to get guns to a mountain fortress he had in the Appalachians where he and his associates would run an anti-slavery guerrilla war. In TTL, he still has the fortress and the ambitions, but fewer guns.

Perhaps if only a couple of states secede, John Brown becomes a US agent fomenting trouble inside those states?