Photos from Featherston's Confederacy/ TL-191

[Alterwright]

@cortz#9 @Allochronian --- And here is my short list on the subject below! Feel free to add your own lists after this one!

Reputations of Pre-Secession (Pre-POD) American Individuals: Part 1 - Soldiers of the Revolutionary War

^^^ Friedrich Von Steuben --- German --- Prussian officer famed for being one of the "fathers" of the United States Army. Wounded twice in the Seven Years War he was one of only 13 officers chosen to participate in a special course of instruction delivered by Frederick the Great. Served as Inspector General of the Continental Army, greatly assisting in its organization and teaching the essentials of military drills and discipline. Owned a greyhound named "Azor" that accompanied him everywhere he went.

Union --- In the years after the Second Mexican War of 1881-1882, Von Steuben's fame and popularity in the United States skyrocketed as closer ties with Germany were established and an influx of Germans immigrated to the United States. Remembrance revauchists put Von Steuben on a pedestal, lionizing him as one of the great symbols for US-German cooperation and his military career in the Continental Army as being critical to the success of the revolution. The image of a professional Prussian officer willingly volunteering his services to train the rag-tag, battered, yet grimly determined American soldiers was not ignored by US political and military officials. Every effort was made to exploit that image to best possible extent, in the best possible light. The US Army experienced a kind of renaissance as German instructors and officers helped reshape organization, administration and training, where allusions to Valley Forge were not lost US officers and recruits alike. The German immigrant community enjoyed a rather warm welcome in the US as well, with "Von Steuben Day" being recognized by some US states as an official holiday to celebrate German heritage and to indirectly support the Remembrance ideology taking hold. In the years after GWI Von Steuben was still well regarded in the US and his good reputation still persisted well into the years after GWII.

Confederacy --- Von Steuben's military career and contributions are inevitably dwarfed by that of George Washington and other foreign military officers to the point of irrelevancy. At best, he is acknowledged for helping to organize George Washington's army, merely a small figure in a larger picture, a footnote compared to the gentlemen officer from Virginia. At worst, his notoriety concerning his rumored homosexuality and relations with young US military aides is brought up as a way to mock US-German relations, portraying him as a flamboyantly queer German officer with "certain reprehensible eccentricities".

-----

^^^ Casimir Pulaski --- Polish --- Considered one of the "founding fathers" of the United States Cavalry. Exiled from Poland after a failed uprising against the Russians, having his titles and rank stripped from him. He earned fame in the American Revolution at the Battle of Brandywine for preventing a disastrous rout and supposedly saving George Washington's army. He died from grievous wounds suffered on the battlefield.

Union --- Like Von Steuben, Pulaski enjoyed respectable popularity in the years after the Second Mexican War in the US, though his reputation was well established in the US even before the war. He is remembered more fondly by US military officials and soldiers rather than civilians as one of the fathers of the US Cavalry, though the Polish communities in the US view him in especially high regard just as German-Americans view Von Steuben in high regard. In fact he is one of four US cavalrymen that have become well-known names to US soldiers - the other three being the Americans Custer and Roosevelt, the other being the Hungarian-born Kovats. US paratroopers in GWII were actually taught a specific challenge-and-password phrase before the Battle of Chattanooga to identify friend and foe - the challenge was "Poland" and the response was "Pulaski".

Confederacy --- Casimir Pulaski is hardly mentioned or even remembered by Confederate historiographers, if at all, though he is not vilified to any extent, unlike Von Steuben. At best he is remembered for his actions at the Battle of Brandywine, but they are, once again, overshadowed by the ever prominent George Washington.

 

[Historyman 14]

@Alterwright, well done!

Who else would you do of Pre-War figures and their Post-Secession reputations next?

 

[oshron]

i seem to remember reading in one of the books that Washington is still greatly admired in both countries but most of the Southern Founding Fathers weren't as well-regarded in the Union just by geographic association, with Jefferson in particular being shafted by the North

 

[cortz#9]

I think a lot of the guys who were considered American heroes of the Mexican American war would be downplayed in the US after the Civil War but still greatly admired in the CSA.

 

[Historyman 14]

I think a lot of the guys who were considered American heroes of the Mexican American war would be downplayed in the US after the Civil War but still greatly admired in the CSA.

The Mexican-American War will be downplay in the Union with a much greater focus on the Revolution and War of 1812, but I can see there a focus on it still between James Polk and the growth of the USA.

I think the next question is how everyone would view both African American Loyalists and African American Patriots.

 

[cortz#9]

The Mexican-American War will be downplay in the Union with a much greater focus on the Revolution and War of 1812, but I can see there a focus on it still between James Polk and the growth of the USA.

I think the next question is how everyone would view both African American Loyalists and African American Patriots.

In the CSA they would be ignored,I'm not sure how much better they might be viewed in the Union.

 

[Alterwright]

@Alterwright, well done!

Who else would you do of Pre-War figures and their Post-Secession reputations next?

@Historyman 14 - I appreciate that, thank you.

I was thinking about doing John Paul Jones, Lafayette, and Benjamin Franklin next. I can give you an idea of what each side might have thought of them as the years go by.

I believe John Paul Jones would remain a controversial US hero well into TL-191, especially for the British, French, and Russians. Although he would still be considered a father of the US Navy, John Adams is more likely to be associated with that sobriquet. He'd likely be portrayed as something of a "bad boy" by the US if his history is looked into more detail.

Benjamin Franklin would likely be held in high regard despite treating with the French diplomatically, but I believe that can be easily manipulated as an example of "savvy American diplomacy and intellect". In this he'd be portrayed as an intellectual willing to treat with "enemies" for the good of the country, to get what the country needs. His efforts to recruit and promote the US cause abroad would be greatly admired and any behind the scenes events that allow the US to diminish any southern founding fathers would be played up.

Lafayette's reputation would be hit the hardest. Despite a legendary reputation in the US pre-secession, where he was welcomed like a hero on his tour in 1824, post-secession both the US and CS would view him differently. Von Steuben would replace Lafayette in terms of legendary status in the North, while the South would still hold him in moderately high regard, though his reputation would diminish over time as Confederate heroes from the War of the Secession would take precedence. In France his reputation would remain the same, albeit more negative over time as the Monarchy returned to France in TL-191.

 

[Alterwright]

i seem to remember reading in one of the books that Washington is still greatly admired in both countries but most of the Southern Founding Fathers weren't as well-regarded in the Union just by geographic association, with Jefferson in particular being shafted by the North

That's right. In fact John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, and Benjamin Franklin are much more highly regarded and lionized in the USA, while Thomas Jefferson and George Washington are legendary figures in the CSA.

John Adams is alluded to be the face on the $5 bill in the US in fact, replacing Lincoln in our timeline.

 

[Historyman 14]

@Historyman 14 - I appreciate that, thank you.

I was thinking about doing John Paul Jones, Lafayette, and Benjamin Franklin next. I can give you an idea of what each side might have thought of them as the years go by.

I believe John Paul Jones would remain a controversial US hero well into TL-191, especially for the British, French, and Russians. Although he would still be considered a father of the US Navy, John Adams is more likely to be associated with that sobriquet. He'd likely be portrayed as something of a "bad boy" by the US if his history is looked into more detail.

Benjamin Franklin would likely be held in high regard despite treating with the French diplomatically, but I believe that can be easily manipulated as an example of "savvy American diplomacy and intellect". In this he'd be portrayed as an intellectual willing to treat with "enemies" for the good of the country, to get what the country needs. His efforts to recruit and promote the US cause abroad would be greatly admired and any behind the scenes events that allow the US to diminish any southern founding fathers would be played up.

Lafayette's reputation would be hit the hardest. Despite a legendary reputation in the US pre-secession, where he was welcomed like a hero on his tour in 1824, post-secession both the US and CS would view him differently. Von Steuben would replace Lafayette in terms of legendary status in the North, while the South would still hold him in moderately high regard, though his reputation would diminish over time as Confederate heroes from the War of the Secession would take precedence. In France his reputation would remain the same, albeit more negative over time as the Monarchy returned to France in TL-191.

Benjamin Franklin I feel would still be call the 'First American' (If he must share it with John Adams, Hamilton, and even John Jay) and rightfully so, as well as a greater focus on his time as a inventor, the Pennsylvania Gazette/Poor Richard, and his civic organizations if only to 'bush away' his ties with France. He could also be seen as a 'forerunner' of the Union's future diplomatic ties with Germany, as well as his 'Join, or Die' and We hang together or hang separately.'

I will say this: Patrick Henry going to complicated as he's in the same boat as Washington and Jefferson as well as his criticisms of the Constitution. He be much more as a Confederate hero, with his slaving grace being his hoped of seeing the end of slavery for the Union.

 

[Alterwright]

The Mexican-American War will be downplay in the Union with a much greater focus on the Revolution and War of 1812, but I can see there a focus on it still between James Polk and the growth of the USA.

I think the next question is how everyone would view both African American Loyalists and African American Patriots.

Ah, yes, the the view of African Americans in TL-191. I believe in the years after GWII, in the post-war reconstruction, there will be more of an effort to look at the history of African Americans and their contribution to American history. That progress, however, will be stymied and the march to equality will take longer. Perhaps we would see the equivalent to Martin Luther King in TL-191, but not the man himself. And even then, I wonder if he would be a peaceful person. Given the Black American experience in TL-191, we may be seeing groups that are more aggressive and even militant. Not sure though.

But before GWII? I think a reader would be lucky to even come across a book that focused on Black Americans. It would be sad.

 

[Alterwright]

Benjamin Franklin I feel would still be call the 'First American' (If he must share it with John Adams, Hamilton, and even John Jay) and rightfully so, as well as a greater focus on his time as a inventor, the Pennsylvania Gazette/Poor Richard, and his civic organizations if only to 'bush away' his ties with France. He could also be seen as a 'forerunner' of the Union's future diplomatic ties with Germany, as well as his 'Join, or Die' and We hang together or hang separately.'

I will say this: Patrick Henry going to complicated as he's in the same boat as Washington and Jefferson as well as his criticisms of the Constitution. He be much more as a Confederate hero, with his slaving grace being his hoped of seeing the end of slavery for the Union.

Indeed. Funny enough this only started because I wanted get names for US tanks. I know it was a British naming convention technically, but you know what? I'll just let it roll.

The only suitable candidates I've come across so far would be "Von Steuben", "Pulaski", and "Kovats" - "Roosevelt" and "Custer" are a given and surprisingly enough 4 out of those 5 are all cavalrymen.

Perhaps I should look into generals during the Indians Wars. At least in TL-191 they could claim to have been successful their endeavors in settling the west, grim as that sounds.

 

[m0585]

Confederate General J. Lawton Collins speaking with one of his regimental commander during the Confederate invasion of Haiti in 1941. Collins was lauded in the post-war U.S. for being one of the few Confederate commanders to limit the excesses of the violence towards civilians and secretly undermine the Population Reduction of Haiti. Despite his magnanimous nature, he was killed by Haitian partisans in Port-au-Prince in late 1942. His actions in undermining the Population Reduction came to light after the war, and a stature was dedicated to his efforts in Port-au-Prince in 1962.

 

[Allochronian]

The Mexican-American War will be downplay in the Union with a much greater focus on the Revolution and War of 1812, but I can see there a focus on it still between James Polk and the growth of the USA.

I think the next question is how everyone would view both African American Loyalists and African American Patriots.

Well... the Mexican-American war is already downplayed in REAL LIFE. USA was basically the bad guy and took nearly half of Mexico's land based on a lie that President Polk said. In TL-191, assuming that U.S.-Mexican relations would be strained due to French involvement and Confederate partnership, the war would be remembered more easily and it will be referred to as the last time the United States won a foreign war until the First Great War and Second Great War. Whenever the Second Mexican War is brought up in American schools, a bunch of hands will raise up and ask, "What about the first one?"

Ah, yes, the the view of African Americans in TL-191. I believe in the years after GWII, in the post-war reconstruction, there will be more of an effort to look at the history of African Americans and their contribution to American history. That progress, however, will be stymied and the march to equality will take longer. Perhaps we would see the equivalent to Martin Luther King in TL-191, but not the man himself. And even then, I wonder if he would be a peaceful person. Given the Black American experience in TL-191, we may be seeing groups that are more aggressive and even militant. Not sure though.

But before GWII? I think a reader would be lucky to even come across a book that focused on Black Americans. It would be sad.

I've always thought that since in real-life every American war has had African Americans involved in some way, there would be a similar history. Just before the War of Secession ended in November 4th, 1862, there ACTUALLY WAS a battle that used African-American soldiers. I imagine that, while very limited, there were African-Americans who fought in the Second Mexican War* and in the First Great War* until they officially could join with U.S. support during the Second Great War*.

*Someday, I'd like to "fill in the gaps" and tweak (change!) a little bit of Turtledove's version of the story, among other specific things, and go into detail about what battles were fought and when and where did Blacks fight during these wars.

 

[Allochronian]

Confederate General J. Lawton Collins speaking with one of his regimental commander during the Confederate invasion of Haiti in 1941. Collins was lauded in the post-war U.S. for being one of the few Confederate commanders to limit the excesses of the violence towards civilians and secretly undermine the Population Reduction of Haiti. Despite his magnanimous nature, he was killed by Haitian partisans in Port-au-Prince in late 1942. His actions in undermining the Population Reduction came to light after the war, and a stature was dedicated to his efforts in Port-au-Prince in 1962.

View attachment 436775

Interesting story. Is this based of something OTL?

 

[m0585]

Interesting story. Is this based of something OTL?

No, not really. It just kind of came to me.

 

[Alterwright]

I've always thought that since in real-life every American war has had African Americans involved in some way, there would be a similar history. Just before the War of Secession ended in November 4th, 1862, there ACTUALLY WAS a battle that used African-American soldiers. I imagine that, while very limited, there were African-Americans who fought in the Second Mexican War* and in the First Great War* until they officially could join with U.S. support during the Second Great War*.

Indeed! I'm not saying that African Americans didn't take part in American wars. I'm just speculating that their contributions would not be regularly recorded or written about as much in books, given that racism towards blacks in TL-191 is still particularly high in the United States and the Confederacy.

For example, I actually do think the US Army would still try to create the "Buffalo Soldiers" in TL-191, especially during the settlement of the west both before and after the Second Mexican War. With the US's new found alliance with Germany and a focus on military spending, recruitment, and training, perhaps we can still see the Buffalo Soldiers come to be in TL-191.

 

[Historyman 14]

Indeed. Funny enough this only started because I wanted get names for US tanks. I know it was a British naming convention technically, but you know what? I'll just let it roll.

The only suitable candidates I've come across so far would be "Von Steuben", "Pulaski", and "Kovats" - "Roosevelt" and "Custer" are a given and surprisingly enough 4 out of those 5 are all cavalrymen.

Perhaps I should look into generals during the Indians Wars. At least in TL-191 they could claim to have been successful their endeavors in settling the west, grim as that sounds.

Given the North's love for Andrew Jackson as jmberry put it, I say 'Old Hickory' could be a good name for a tank.

That would be interesting, if grim.

 

[Alterwright]

Given the North's love for Andrew Jackson as jmberry put it, I say 'Old Hickory' could be a good name for a tank.

That would be interesting, if grim.

@cortz#9

Oh yeah! Good point! That would also be handy since I don't think the North would want to name a tank after Andrew Jackson, only to get it confused with the South's own Stonewall Jackson. "Old Hickory" sounds like it could be the name of a thickly armored tank.

 

[m0585]

U.S. Army Air Corps General Billy Mitchell posing for his official photograph in 1919. A proponent of the importance of air power in battle, General Mitchell would rapidly rise through the ranks in GWI to eventually command all U.S. air squadrons on the Canadian Front. In 1919, President Roosevelt would name General Mitchell as the first Chief of the Army Air Corps. Mitchell, described as the "Morrell of air power", would use his time in office to argue for the Army Air Corps becoming a separate branch, the development of strategic bombers that could be used to attack the industrial heartland of the enemy, the creation of fighters that could be used independently for offensive operations. He supposedly worked with Morrell to develop attack squadrons that could protect and clear a path for armored units to advance (though historians can find no hard evidence that this was the case). Eventually, he found himself constantly frustrated at the lack of funding his branch received during the Sinclair Administration. An apocryphal story states that when Assistant Secretary of War Norman Thomas told Mitchell that President Sinclair's budget necessitated getting rid of 100 planes, Mitchell stated "then I recommend the President put his head up his ass and find the money."

Mitchell would retire in 1923 and pass away in 1936. But his theories on air power would live on into the next war and be espoused and practiced by such men as James Doolittle, Carl Spaatz, and Hap Arnold. Perhaps the most significant praise for General Mitchell came during an interview that General Morrell gave in 1961 when he stated: "If the War Department had embraced General Mitchell's ideas in the 20's, then the Ohio Campaign in 1941 might have been very different."

 

[Gaius Julius Magnus]

Okay guys, real question here:

What American Founding Fathers or heroes of the American Revolution would still be held in high regard by both the United States and Confederacy? What people from the War of 1812? The Mexican War?

Asking this because I want names for United States tanks. Random I know.

The books mention a couple of times US and Confederate views of the Founding Fathers are split largely along regional lines of where they were born. The US admires Franklin, Adams, etc while the CS admires Washington. Featherston was shown to be an outlier for his distaste of Washington being a US President.

As others have said, Von Steuben would probably replace Lafayette as the famous foreigner who joined the Revolution in the memories of Northeners.

In terms of other generals from US history, I could actually see Winfield Scott enjoying a more prominent version in US memory than he does now. Prior to the Great War, he would have been the main general associated with the last war the US won (the First Mexican War) and, despite being from Virginia, he remained loyal to the Union out the outbreak of the ACW. Jackson is also a probable candidate and Zachary Taylor for similar reasons to Scott but to a lesser degree.