Stonewall Jackso at Gettysburg: Jackson's Charge instead of Pickett's Charge?????

In order to have Stonewall Jackson at Gettysburg, we have to practically assume that there is no accidental shooting of Jackson, and also assume that there are other significant butterflies between May and July 1863.

The question i am asking is whether or not Stonewall Jackson, on the third day/July 3, could pull off a successful charge like Pickett couldn't?
Could Jackson ensure victory, or would he perhaps go down like Armistead in the charge?
 
Jackson would have probably have agreed with Longstreet that the Confederates should not fight at Gettysburg. The two of them would probably have been able to convince Lee to withdraw to more favorable positions for the Army of Northern Virginia.

If Jackson had survived Chancellorsville, does Lee reorganize the army? Remember in OTL he restructured the Army of Northern Virginia from 2 corps into 3, and 2 of those commanders (A.P. Hill and Richard Ewell) had never commanded at the corps level prior to Gettysburg.
 
Pickett is unfairly maligned for the charge. It was possibly Lee's worst idea-- probably no army in the world could have pulled that off. Jackson wouldn't have done much better. Pickett was a mediocre general but he should not be blamed for the disaster at Gettysburg. Look at 5 forks for a more fair judge of his career.
 
I suppose it depends where Jackson is in the line of march. There were opportunities missed on the first day of battle a more aggressive commander like him most likely would not have missed.
 
In order to have Stonewall Jackson at Gettysburg, we have to practically assume that there is no accidental shooting of Jackson, and also assume that there are other significant butterflies between May and July 1863.

A fair assumption. Lee's initial goals in invading Maryland and Pennsylvania were two-fold:

Re-victual his army for the coming year (hugely successful, the AoNV ate vastly better in the Winter of 1863-64 than they would the following winter.

Act as a diversion, hopefully draw off Grant's forces from Vicksburg. Total fail.

Destroying Hooker's army would be a huge bonus, but it wasn't his first objective. He couldn't "plan" on the enemy giving him the opportunity.

The question i am asking is whether or not Stonewall Jackson, on the third day/July 3, could pull off a successful charge like Pickett couldn't?
It wasn't Pickett's Charge, it was Longstreet's. Though to be fair, it was really Lee's.:( OTOH, contrary to myth, had Lee followed Longstreet's (begging) advice to flank the Round Tops, the ACW would have been over by Christmas. Despiter all the grief Lee gets for ordering the charge, at least his idea was better than Longstreet's .

Oh, and if all things are the same save for Jackson's survival? Then he is actually well to the north on the Culp's Hill/Gettysburg/Cemetery Hill flank. Because of positioning, its likely one of the two OTL divisions of Heth and Pender remain under Longstreet's command for this battle. Anderson was supposed to send in at least part of his own division, but they were so shattered from Day 2 that they weren't up to it.

In truth? Jackson being there on Day 1 means XI and I Corps probably get totally routed from Gettysburg, creating a moderate operational victory for the AoNV.

Unfortunately for Lee, this means he will be advancing on the dug in Federals on the Pipe Creek Line, which is where Meade wanted to fight in the first place. Worse for the Southrons than Gettysburg. Unflankable, with a live rail line running right behind the Federals and out of sight of the Southern army.

Also, Stuart's troopers will be arriving one day later, with even more cases of the men falling off their horses and the horses dropping dead. So too another day's hard marching for Lee's army, while Meade's army will be fresher, falling back on their own lines, and being able to bring more forces of VIII Corps into the battle, and the Maryland, Pennsylvania, (and better, New York) State Militias threatening Lee's LOC.

A Battle of the Pipe Creek Line would almost be as bad as following Longstreet's suggestions. Though at least Lee could call off the slaughter when he'd had enough. OR it could be "Pickett's Charge" for the entire AoNV:eek:

Could Jackson ensure victory, or would he perhaps go down like Armistead in the charge?
Armistead led a brigade, not a expanded corps. Jackson was IIRC the XO of the AoNV. He's not making a charge like that himself. Trimble was gravely wounded, true. But he was a newly promoted divisional commander.

Jackson would have probably have agreed with Longstreet that the Confederates should not fight at Gettysburg. The two of them would probably have been able to convince Lee to withdraw to more favorable positions for the Army of Northern Virginia.

Agreed. But what Lee does after he learns that Meade is refusing to take the bait is anybody's guess. Lee knows that Meade has ultimately the forces of the various state militias, plus eventually IV (technically de-activated but still there), VII, VIII, and IX Corps:eek: that could arrive IF Lee just hangs around long enough for them to arrive. At best, Lee has two extra brigades, and they are all the way down in Richmond. And his artillery ammunition train is still coming up from Staunton.:(

If Jackson had survived Chancellorsville, does Lee reorganize the army?
If it ain't broke, don't fix it:p

Remember in OTL he restructured the Army of Northern Virginia from 2 corps into 3, and 2 of those commanders (A.P. Hill and Richard Ewell) had never commanded at the corps level prior to Gettysburg.
Jackson would be vastly affronted. While Longstreet would just grumble.

Jackson would honestly probably not fare too much better. Little Round Top might go differently though.

It was both a close run affair and doomed at the same time. Just repeat after me:

VI Corps, VI Corps, VI Corps...:cool:

Probably a meeting engagement for Sedgwick's boys, suffering at first before swarming over Hood's bled out and exhausted troops. The incline up Little Round Top isn't nearly as bad on the Union side approach as on the Confederate side. Though to be fair, its hard to imagine an incline that could be worse, short of a sheer face covered in axle grease:p

Pickett is unfairly maligned for the charge. It was possibly Lee's worst idea-- probably no army in the world could have pulled that off. Jackson wouldn't have done much better. Pickett was a mediocre general but he should not be blamed for the disaster at Gettysburg. Look at 5 forks for a more fair judge of his career.

Nobody in the South wanted to blame Lee and it was too well known that Longstreet opposed the move. Not that that didn't stop Jubal Early from trying to scapegoat Longstreet.

His orders to launch the charge on Day Three was his worst idea, but it wasn't his greatest failure as a commander.

His greatest command failure was wasting four full days refusing to believe Beauregard's desperate pleadings (screaming, really:rolleyes:)
for help when Beauregard insisted that that Grant had crossed the James River and was closing on Petersburg!:eek: Beauregard was right, and Lee was wrong.:eek: *face-palm, y'all*:D

The attack COULD have worked. All it required was for the Yankees to run away at the sight of all those Southern troops charging up at them, doing their fearsome yell [which they didn't do, as it was too exhausting to do on an incline covering 1.2 miles (1)].

Damned unsportsmanlike of the Yankees not to run.:rolleyes:

1) The distance widening the further south you go along the lines of attack. Trimble's and Pettigrew's men had the shortest distance to travel, but also faced the worst most accurate first from the first moments of their approach. By the time Pickett even reached the Emmitsburg Road, the Confederates on the far left flank of the assault were already in full retreat.

These troops had been badly bloodied on Day 1, Lee had not been appraised of this, and they were very poorly led. One of these officers, Brokenborough, would be dismissed from the army by December for incompetence. Another, Davis, was Jefferson Davis' nephew. He made as good a military leader as his uncle.:rolleyes:

But getting back to Pickett? Yeah, he earned his last place finish in his West Point graduating class. And to think of all the lies told postwar that Grant had also been a bottom rung graduate. No scholar, but no class dunce either.
 
Last edited:
I suppose it depends where Jackson is in the line of march. There were opportunities missed on the first day of battle a more aggressive commander like him most likely would not have missed.

Like understanding Lee's order to take the hills south of Gettysburg. Unlike Ewell, Jackson probably would have taken them, no matter the cost.
 
I suppose it depends where Jackson is in the line of march. There were opportunities missed on the first day of battle a more aggressive commander like him most likely would not have missed.

Like understanding Lee's order to take the hills south of Gettysburg. Unlike Ewell, Jackson probably would have taken them, no matter the cost.

Its hard to see Jackson being as cautious as Ewell regarding Culps Hill. He wouldn't have waited for Johnson's Division, the smallest in the AoNV, for support.

A question though that just occurred to me? What if Jackson, desiring the force the Susquehanna River, tries? Its hopeless, and it could delay him by several crucial hours. OTOH, I can't see him not marching to the sound of the guns.
 
:D

The attack COULD have worked. All it required was for the Yankees to run away at the sight of all those Southern troops charging up at them, doing their fearsome yell [which they didn't do, as it was too exhausting to do on an incline covering 1.2 miles (1)].

Damned unsportsmanlike of the Yankees not to run.:rolleyes:

1) The distance widening the further south you go along the lines of attack. Trimble's and Pettigrew's men had the shortest distance to travel, but also faced the worst most accurate first from the first moments of their approach. By the time Pickett even reached the Emmitsburg Road, the Confederates on the far left flank of the assault were already in full retreat.
.

Well, they could have broken the center, possibly, and you know the Yankees would have run even if it were a couple squads of worn out men. :rolleyes: After all they did nothing but run the entire war!:rolleyes:
 
Why? It was Longstreet's corps that charged but Longstreet himself was not part of the charge. One of the divisional commander, Pickett, did not charge either. Someone needed to coordinate it at the corps level, great big blunder that it was. The other two divisional commanders, Pettigrew and Trimble, were too new and thus led their troops. Jackson would have hung back just as much as Longstreet or Pickett did. After all, he did not die charging, he died scouting.
 
Looking at the Wiki article of Gettysburg, I see some opening for Jackson to seize the high ground, but George Meade doesn't need to attack the AoNV on strong defensive ground--simply cutting off their supply lines and route of return home would probably force some kind of decisive battle.

I could potentially see Lee gaining a tactical victory instead of a decisive defeat if he manages to face Meade on more neutral ground--a way to inflict more union casualties than he suffers himself. But like Antietam, Lee didn't gain a decisive victory he needs, and he'll need to take his troops home. Lincoln can give an ATL Gettysburg based on the achievement of stopping the Confederacy's plans, and of course, Vicksburg falls as well.

Depending on the way this plays out, US Grant either replaces Meade, Meade has died in the fighting, and Winfield Hancock gets promoted (probably working for newly promoted Lieutenant General Grant), or Meade manages to come out of the fight with his career intact.

I just don't see the dramatic Confederate Victory Lee wanted and the Confederacy needed.
 
Well, they could have broken the center, possibly, and you know the Yankees would have run even if it were a couple squads of worn out men. :rolleyes: After all they did nothing but run the entire war!:rolleyes:

Lee did have a problem with learning the lessons of Malvern Hill.

If Jackson is still alive he probably dies charging the line instead.

Where and when? His troops would be on the wrong flank, and frankly the consensus seems to be that with Jackson alive there is only a "little Gettysburg".
 
Why? It was Longstreet's corps that charged but Longstreet himself was not part of the charge. One of the divisional commander, Pickett, did not charge either. Someone needed to coordinate it at the corps level, great big blunder that it was. The other two divisional commanders, Pettigrew and Trimble, were too new and thus led their troops. Jackson would have hung back just as much as Longstreet or Pickett did. After all, he did not die charging, he died scouting.

The charge was a simple affair of tactics. Using Trimble's division as the anchor, and Pettigrew supporting him, they just marched forward. They didn't have any other choice. If they veered left, they crashed into Gettysburg town. If they veered right, they crossed over into Pickett's formations. So it was up to Pickett to make sure that his men kept close to Trimble.

Problem: Trimble and Pettigrew were getting shot to pieces and forced to withdraw while Pickett's men continued their advance in a shallow recession in the field, shielded from Yankee fire. So while every Union gun on the battlefield, much of it at point blank range, was blowing apart men who'd already suffered badly only 48 hours previously, as far as Pickett could see from his vantage point, everything was going fine.

By the time his division reached the Emmittsburg Road, Trimble's and Pettigrew's men were mostly broken, and Pickett's men finally emerged out from that recession, only to find themselves lined up like ten pins in front of the no longer distracted Union guns. At no place in the battle did more men fall at once. Whole companies were wiped out trying to cross that road, with Hunt's guns zeroes in on their positions.

By that time, there was nothing for a divisional commander to do. According to survivors, Pickett's three brigade commanders did their best, but the odds were impossible. Frankly, Lee seemed to get the idea that even if the Yankees didn't run away (1), Meade would be unable to re-enforce Cemetery Ridge once the barrage began. Meade did. By the time the charge ended, the Union had three times the number of men they did when they started (minus casualties).

1) Lee correctly estimated the Union force in the center to be 5000. Which COULD have been weak enough to be broken, though at incredible cost. By the time the last of his assault force still standing got back to Seminary Ridge, Cemetery Ridge had a Union force as strong as Lee's assault force was at the start.:eek:

Pickett was just where he needed to be for the attack. If Pickett were closer he'd be drawing enemy fire and leaving no one to move Armistead's reserve force if needed to another point in the advance, or to call for a general retreat (no chance or time for that in such a maelstrom). Since Armistead did just as he should have done to exploit whatever little weakness he could find in the Union positions (the clump of trees), Pickett didn't need to act.

Pettigrew and Trimble were closer because the placement of their troops so close to the enemy's positions mandated where THEY had to be.

I think if there's any reason why Pickett draws ire beyond his later war service its because of his marked enthusiasm for the Charge, in which he didn't get a scratch. Pettigrew would be dead in 10 days. Trimble lost his leg and had to be left behind as a PoW.
 
Picket's Charge was doomed. Jackson being in command wouldn't change anything in that situation. He would have had a much better likelihood of affecting the events of the first day.
We're going to have to presume that the Army is not reorganized. The only reason it was in the first place that Lee recognized that Hill and Ewell could not be trusted to handle them as large they had been (25,000-35,000). Based on this, it's hard to say who the leading divisions would have been into Gettysburg. However, it's hard to imagine Jackson allowing Rodes to make the intial disastrous uncoordinated assaults that allowed the I and XI corps to hold onto their vulnerable flank as long as they did. It's also hard to imagine Jackson not attacking Culp's Hill considering its vulnerable state at the close of the day, being virtually undefended. While Culp's was likely the best defensive position on the field, it needed men to defend it. Jackson would have at least probed it, and in the process discovered its weakness. His taking it virtually butterflies away the rest of the battle. Its position dominated the Union right, and lay on its line of retreat. Meade would hace had to retake it, or retreat. Considering Meade didn't even want to fight at Gettysburg anyway, he would have pulled back to Pipe Creek. What happens from there is anybody's guess.
 
Last edited:

Anaxagoras

Banned
The stickler in me wants to point out that, had Jackson lived, butterflies would ensure that the Battle of Gettysburg almost certainly never takes place because the two months preceding it would have gone completely differently than they did IOTL. Having said that...

Jackson would have strongly opposed Pickett's Charge. His maxim was to "always mystify, mislead, and surprise the enemy", which is exactly what Pickett's Charge was not. Together, he and Longstreet would have been able to dissuade Lee from such a foolish course of action.

The more entertaining question of Jackson-At-Gettysburg scenarios has more to do with Cemetery Hill and Culp's Hill on the evening of the first day.
 
Looking at the Wiki article of Gettysburg, I see some opening for Jackson to seize the high ground

Are you referring to Culp's Hill on Day 1? I think everyone can agree with that.:)

Mary Tzu can't divine a way to take Cemetery Ridge on Day 3:p

but George Meade doesn't need to attack the AoNV on strong defensive ground--simply cutting off their supply lines and route of return home would probably force some kind of decisive battle.

Unfortunately that would require a level of command that did not yet exist. No General-In-Chief to order the concentration of ALL Union forces in the region so as to get south of Lee's army and cut off his arteries at Williamsport and Falling Waters, both of which were shockingly poorly protected.

I could potentially see Lee gaining a tactical victory instead of a decisive defeat if he manages to face Meade on more neutral ground--a way to inflict more union casualties than he suffers himself.

Meade has just taken command. He isn't attacking. And believe it or not, Gettysburg IS the more "neutral ground". Anything more neutral won't be contested by one side or the other. Traditionally, the Union always suffered more casualties than the Confederates. But then, they could afford to. 27 million Northerners to 9 million Southerners, including 4 million Slaves and 1 million Southern Unionist Whites.

What was unique about Gettysburg was both the heavy casualties on both sides and that it was the South that suffered a higher proportion of them. For the South to get pasted in a battle was hardly unheard of. But it was unheard of in any battle of any large size AND to leave more fallen Southrons than Yankees.

But like Antietam, Lee didn't gain a decisive victory he needs, and he'll need to take his troops home. Lincoln can give an ATL Gettysburg based on the achievement of stopping the Confederacy's plans, and of course, Vicksburg falls as well.

In fact, neither side OTL appreciated just how big a win Gettysburg was for the North. That took a few months, by which time the war had moved on.

Depending on the way this plays out, US Grant either replaces Meade, Meade has died in the fighting, and Winfield Hancock gets promoted (probably working for newly promoted Lieutenant General Grant), or Meade manages to come out of the fight with his career intact.

Grant came to the HQ of the Army of the Potomac more or less determined to replace Meade, but was so impressed by Meade's professionalism and lack of ambition that he quickly changed his mind. He was determined to promote within though. The only significant western general he brought with him at the start was Sheridan, to replace Pleasanton, a cavalry commander with a most indifferent record.

Meade could well die in an ATL Gettysburg (one of his aides in his HQ was killed by fragments during the 3rd Day barrage). Hancock would have to be spared the crippling wound he suffered during the same bombardment.

Meade's problems were more political. He was a good general, but his relations with the press were non-existent, and Lincoln didn't by this time trust any general out of the AotP. He was still the Hero of Gettysburg, but his cable to Lincoln about "driving the invaders from our soil" caused Abe to blow a gasket. "Pennsylvania is our soil, Maryland is our soil, Virginia is our soil, IT IS ALL OUR SOIL!":mad:

I just don't see the dramatic Confederate Victory Lee wanted and the Confederacy needed.

It would require an incompetent Meade, or any Union officer insane enough to charge Seminary Ridge. Considering what happened at Fredericksburg, I imagine any "crazy general" trying to do this will face a revolt by his corps commanders.
 
Considering Meade didn't even want to fight at Gettysburg anyway, he would have pulled back to Pipe Creek. What happens from there is anybody's guess.

A curbstomp of the AoNV that makes Gettysburg look like barroom brawl.

The stickler in me wants to point out that, had Jackson lived, butterflies would ensure that the Battle of Gettysburg almost certainly never takes place because the two months preceding it would have gone completely differently than they did IOTL. Having said that...

There are butterflies, and there are butterflies. Note:
-----------------------------------------------
Grant is still rampaging at the Mississippi

Chancellorsville has happened

Hooker is "broken" and has lost all confidence

Washington has lost all confidence in Hooker

Lee needs to divert Union attention and force troops away from Vicksburg

Lee needs to re-victual his army for the year and next winter

Northern Virginia cannot do that, its been picked clean

In the North lay widen open rich farmland with all they need

SW and SE Virginia has also been secured

The AotP is and will be suffering from expiring enlistments

The upcoming first Draft is threatening chaos in the North
-----------------------------------------------------------------
So...

Setting aside "Falls off his horse and dies" scenarios...:rolleyes:
------------------------------------------------------------------
Just how many things CAN happen?

An "accidental engagement" at Gettysburg? Yes

Avoid Stuart's joyride? Yes

Make Stuart's joyride worse? Yes

Hooker's firing? Inevitable

Reynolds' demurral of command? Inevitable

Meade's promotion? Inevitable

Cancel of an invasion of the North? NO-NO-NO

Don't send a corps to Johnston? As long as Lee is alive...not in summer

Keep Burford's brigades from Gettysburg? Definittely a chance of that

Have the Confederates avoid Gettysburg completely? Not a chance. 7 roads.

Go for Harrisburg? They can try. And fail.

Go for Washington? With a three year layover at Point Lookout Military Prison

Go for Baltimore? With the AotP, the DC garrison, the militias all at your back

Sometimes a butterfly is just a butterfly

Of course there will be changes. But IMVHO, the river will continue to flow in the same direction, just with different eddies and currents.

Jackson would have strongly opposed Pickett's Charge. His maxim was to "always mystify, mislead, and surprise the enemy", which is exactly what Pickett's Charge was not. Together, he and Longstreet would have been able to dissuade Lee from such a foolish course of action.

Agreed. Unfortunately, Lee was hearing what he wanted to hear from Ewell, who was aping what his subordinates, especially Early, were saying. Hill, of course, being as sick and ineffectual as ever.

The more entertaining question of Jackson-At-Gettysburg scenarios has more to do with Cemetery Hill and Culp's Hill on the evening of the first day.

The consensus seems to be as StevenColbert27 describes. Much more of I & XI Corps destroyed, and fall back to Pipe Creek.
 
I think it is disingenuous presume that Lee would do Meade the favor of attacking him. Pipe Creek was as strong a position as Lee's line at Fredericksburg, if not more so. Though Lee attacked strong positions at OTL Gettysburg, and if his blood was up, no one could dissuade him from attacking, so I suppose anything is possible.
Also, the taking of Cemetery Hill would have been extremely costly, if not impossible, by direct assault. Howard was able to squeeze together a hundred guns on the Hill. Any attack would have been Malvern Hill all over again. Jackson would have seen this, and gone after Culp's instead, forcing the abandonment of Cemetary.
 
Last edited:

Anaxagoras

Banned
In fact, neither side OTL appreciated just how big a win Gettysburg was for the North. That took a few months, by which time the war had moved on.

This is a point I wish more people grasped. Gettysburg was not the decisive battle of the war. In fact, I don't think there was a decisive battle. The South could have lost the war before Gettysburg and they could have won the war after it.

When you read the letters and diaries of Confederate soldiers in the months leading up to the 1864 spring campaign, you find little discouragement and high morale. They expected the coming campaign to be decisive and they expected to win it. Gettysburg was seen as essentially another Sharpsburg - they might not have won, but neither did they think they had lost. One phrase that is often repeated in letters of Confederate soldiers in the spring of 1864 is, in effect, "Lee has never been defeated."
 
Top