WI Union Victory at the Crater

John Fredrick Parker

Donor
What if Meade had let Burnside stick with his original plan of sending in the trained colored troops first at the Battle of the Crater? Would it have turned the battle to a Union Victory; would Petersburg, and thus the Confederacy, have fallen earlier? What are the effects? On reputations (of Burnside, the USCT, etc)? On Lincoln's re-election? On Reconstruction? On anything else I'm not thinking of?

(previous threads)
 

Mac Gregor

I recently listened to the audio book Battle of the Crater (AKA To Make Men Free) by Newt Gingrich and William R. Forstchen. It made me think that the plan certainly had merit and if carried out properly could have resulted in a significant Union victory. I think it is possible that if the battle went decisively for the Union, Richmond may have fallen soon afterwards. On the other hand, as with most attacks during the Civil War things often didn't go as planned so it is entirely possible that the North would have botched any exploitation of their victory.
 

John Fredrick Parker

Donor
Mac Gregor said:
On the other hand, as with most attacks during the Civil War things often didn't go as planned so it is entirely possible that the North would have botched any exploitation of their victory.
Click to expand...

Care to elaborate a little? What are the plausible outcomes of the first offensive being competently carried out?
 

Johnrankins

If they went around the crater instead of in it and did so right away it would have likely worked. Using the troops that actually trained for it would have helped as well.
 

Rich Rostrom

John Fredrick Parker said:
What if Meade had let Burnside stick with his original plan of sending in the trained colored troops first at the Battle of the Crater? Would it have turned the battle to a Union Victory;
Click to expand...

Probably yes. Though Ferrero, commander of the USCT division, was apparently no better than Ledlie, the gross incompetent of the division that was sent in first. But if the USCT go in first, and their planning was at all useful, I think that momentum would carry the Union attack clear through the Rebel line.

It's possible that even so, Lee would have contained the attack at some point, but it seems likely that the entire line to the west would be forced back, cutting the South Side Railroad, and forcing the Rebels out of Petersburg.

would Petersburg, and thus the Confederacy, have fallen earlier?
Click to expand...

Petersburg falls. It's generally conceded this means the fall of Richmond, though I'm not absolutely sure why. (The primary rail connection from Richmond to the Deep South ran through Petersburg - but it was cut when Petersburg was besieged. There was a secondary line from Petersburg to the west and southwest - but it intersected a line running directly SW from Richmond, so I don't see why it was vital.)

If Richmond goes, the CSA takes a big hit and probably dies by the end of 1864.

What are the effects? On reputations (of Burnside,
Click to expand...

A significant boost. He might end up as President. OTL, he was remarkably popular despite Fredericksburg and the Crater. Most of the other generals liked him, and he had enough fans in the rank and file to be a Commander-in-Chief of the GAR and the first head of the National Rifle Association.

the USCT, etc)?
Click to expand...

I think it gets the USCT a good deal of credit.

On Lincoln's re-election?
Click to expand...

It becomes a lock.

On Reconstruction?
Click to expand...

I can't see a direct effect. There would be substantial effects from the earlier Union victory, and butterflies galore, especially regarding Lincoln.

The higher profile of the USCT could lead to earlier support for black suffrage.

On anything else I'm not thinking of?
Click to expand...

Possibly an improved reputation for Meade, though I don't know how much the Crater fiasco was attributed to him at the time. Also perhaps a diminished reputation for Phil Sheridan - no Valley Campaign, Five Forks, or Appomattox. Some other battles (in North Carolina?) might replace these.
 
wcv215

wcv215

Rich Rostrom said:
Petersburg falls. It's generally conceded this means the fall of Richmond, though I'm not absolutely sure why. (The primary rail connection from Richmond to the Deep South ran through Petersburg - but it was cut when Petersburg was besieged. There was a secondary line from Petersburg to the west and southwest - but it intersected a line running directly SW from Richmond, so I don't see why it was vital.)
Click to expand...

Basically Petersburg was the center of CS supply for the much of the region the battle was fighting in. Without it Richmond was impossible to hold.

What's more, both Lee and Grant knew its importance, and Richmond was not the target of Grant's campaign, Lee and his army were. Without them Richmond would fall no matter what. Pinning Lee at Petersburg and either starving him to surrender to forcing a final decisive battle (the ANV could not win by this point) was the primary objective.
 

John Fredrick Parker

Donor
OK, I think at the very least we're agreed using the USCT as planned would mean Petersburg falls in the ensuing battle; and wcv, I think, has established that Petersburg falling will mean Richmond falls soon after. At the very least, losing Richmond would be "a big hit" to the CSA (as Rich said).

Now I think it could well still be a crippling blow, but that raises an interesting point: TTL, Richmond falls before the November election, likely even before the Democratic Convention. Who wants to bet the Copperheads still run things TTL? Even if Lincoln's lock is guaranteed, it still completely changes the General Election. And if Richmond has fallen, but the Election still has to happen, do the rebel troops hold out? Or do they still surrender in a matter of weeks? If the former, what do they do once they've lost both their capital and the election (though here, in that order)?
 

Rich Rostrom

John Fredrick Parker said:
Actually, the interesting (in the Chinese sense) thing about this, is that TTL Richmond is likely falling before the November election, likely even before the Democratic Convention. Who wants to bet the Copperheads still run things TTL?
Click to expand...

That's a huge point and one I'd overlooked. (I checked on the Republican Convention, which was in June, so not affected.)

There are several possible effects on the Democrats. The most obvious is that the Peace Democrats (who are not really Copperheads, that's going too far) will not be in charge. There will be no peace plank in the platform.

Another one is that they may not nominate McClellan. The obvious implication in McClellan's nomination was that he was the successful general discarded by the Republicans, who then put a series of failures in charge. (This is of course only looking at Virginia.) Even Grant seemed a failure as of summer 1864, with the massive casualties of the Overland Campaign, for no decisive result.

(Of course nominating McClellan as the better leader to win the war clashed brutally with the plank calling for an end to the war, which killed the Democrats anyway.)

If Richmond falls, this suggestion falls dead. Grant, chosen by the Republicans, has done what McClellan failed abjectly to do. McClellan is now "the loser".

Perhaps the Democrats take a totally different tack, campaigning against "nigger equality" and promising a quick "conservative" Reconstruction; perhaps starting with opposition to the 13th Amendment as a campaign plank. (Immoral confiscation of property from loyal Unionists in the Border States! Social revolution, setting black savages free to prey on whites! And compete for jobs with whites!) Their candidate would be a War Democrat, but one without McClellan's baggage. McClernand?
 

John Fredrick Parker

Donor
Admiral Halsey said:
Assuming Lincoln doesn't get assassinated a better Reconstruction might ensue. Civil Rights doing better and less if any Jim Crow laws.
Click to expand...

Well yes, but that applies to Lincoln avoiding assassination in general; if, say, the butterfly net doesn't catch this event (though I'm wide open to arguments that say it would, so long as its not just "butterflies"), what changes? I assume Lincoln is still re-elected, and since the PoD is after the RNC, Andrew Johnson is still his running mate.
 

sloreck

If Richmond falls in spring/summer 1864 (crater succeeds->Petersburg falls->Richmond falls), then Lincoln is unbeatable, no matter who the democrats nominate. Loss of Richmond is huge blow, and don;t forget the only serious ironworks (Tredegar) in the CSA was in Richmond along with the whole bureaucracy that ran things. The CSA would still have Atlanta, so the fight could continue but IMHO by fall 1864/early winter the CSA throws in the sponge.

Grant will not run (certainly not as a democrat) as he, unlike McClellan, was still a serving officer & probably still fighting up to CSA surrender. Even Grant could not beat Lincoln. Lots of reasons why this is 100% for sure (Grant not running) too detailed to go in to here.

Assuming reconstruction starts fall/early winter 1864 with Lincoln still expect a softer reconstruction because the number of radicals in Congress will be less until the newly elected ones from 11/1864 sworn in, and no "martyr" to make up for. Of course if Lincoln is assassinated in April, 1865 (ignoring butterflies) then reconstruction may get as hard as OTL.
 

John Fredrick Parker

Donor
sloreck said:
Assuming reconstruction starts fall/early winter 1864 with Lincoln still expect a softer reconstruction because the number of radicals in Congress will be less until the newly elected ones from 11/1864 sworn in, and no "martyr" to make up for. Of course if Lincoln is assassinated in April, 1865 (ignoring butterflies) then reconstruction may get as hard as OTL.
Click to expand...

Actually, this is interesting -- regardless of whether or not Lincoln is still killed, if the war ends sooner, he might not move toward the Radical Republican position in the next few months, which could mean Reconstruction is softer (either by Lincoln's hand or by his legacy).
 

Elcheapodeca

Is it possible that the Battle of the Crater will become a major pop culture icon of the Civil War. It seems that alot of the stuff about it (especially if it is a major war winning victory) will make it widely known in the U.S atleast (It will also likley be doubly popular within the African-American community.)

This, however, is if post-war historians influenced by the lost cause myth and the general racism within society try to diminish the importance of the battle because it was fought by African Americans.
 

Admiral Halsey

Banned
Elcheapodeca said:
Is it possible that the Battle of the Crater will become a major pop culture icon of the Civil War. It seems that alot of the stuff about it (especially if it is a major war winning victory) will make it widely known in the U.S atleast (It will also likley be doubly popular within the African-American community.)

This, however, is if post-war historians influenced by the lost cause myth and the general racism within society try to diminish the importance of the battle because it was fought by African Americans.
Click to expand...

I may be a bit idealistic about this but IMO with the USCT's doing the heavy lifting for what ITTL would be the winning battle racism regarding African Americans would be reduced.
 

John Fredrick Parker

Donor
Admiral Halsey said:
I may be a bit idealistic about this but IMO with the USCT's doing the heavy lifting for what ITTL would be the winning battle racism regarding African Americans would be reduced.
Click to expand...

This was my thought starting the thread, but now I wonder if an earlier end to the war means the "mild reconstructionists" are in a better position politically. It's something I'd really love more thoughts on.
 

Admiral Halsey

Banned
John Fredrick Parker said:
This was my thought starting the thread, but now I wonder if an earlier end to the war means the "mild reconstructionists" are in a better position politically. It's something I'd really love more thoughts on.
Click to expand...

Well it all hinges on if Lincoln still gets assassinated. As long as he's in charge reconstruction will be milder then the OTL but if he dies the Radical Republican's would be controlling it then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top