Please, like the update to let me know you're still reading and you're still interested! Seeing your support is what motivates me the most!
It would indeed be interesting. Beauregard will feature prominently in this TL!
Sorry But I had finally finished the update and I couldn't wait to post it.
Yes. I think it was Foote who said the soldiers saw no reason why they should obey their neighbors, because even if they put on a hatt and gain a fancy title, they're still their neighbors.
I think those fell pretty quickly OTL, and even if Virginia somehow managed to get soldiers there, they probably left after the Army of the Susquehanna was formed.
Thank you very much! OTL, Stanton replaced Cameron in January 1862. The greater political power of Lincoln (he's THE midwestern Republican ITTL) and the more critical situation probably means he will replace Cameron earlier.
I'll write a mini-update about this in the future.
It's really ironic than in their pursuit of states rights, agrarianism and all that stuff, the Confederacy became far more centralized and tyrannical than the Union ever was. As McPherson says, Davis had to "don the mantle of Hamilton" even though they followed the ideals of Jefferson.
It's unlikely a prolonged siege could be maintained, and Union naval supremacy basically means Fort McHenry can be supplied for a long, long time.
The Southern advantage in manpower was temporary and short-lived. By August, 1861, the Army of the Susquehanna is already bigger than Beauregard's Army of Maryland (or the Chesapeake, I haven't decided a name yet). Volunteers deserve their own mini-update, but I think it's too early for that. To be frank, I can't come up with a topic for the next mini-update, so if anyone has a suggestion, please tell me.
Indeed. Also to consider, though the Union had in theory a manpower advantage of 4-to-1 (counting only white men), they weren't able to recruit non-naturalized immigrants, people who were too far away, or disloyal men, so that advantage was reduced to 3.5-to-1, and in practice they often had double or triple the Southern numbers.
Those are the numbers McPherson gives in his analysis of the Northern industrial advantage. They become starker if we go into specifics, particularly regarding military material: the Union produced "97 percent of the country's firearms in i860, 94 percent of its cloth, 93 percent of its pig iron, and more than 90 percent of its boots and shoes."
Despite the hatred for political officers and people who raised regiments and then appointed themselves, some good generals had their origins there. Grant may be the greatest example.
See, of everything, I am not too surprised that the ego's of these three will never change. Both Davis and Johnston are products of their class and Beauregard is at best a "creole upstart". Having actually read some of that correspondence its amazing at the vitriol that is written.
And there has been the incessant rumor that Johnston and Davis hated each other because of some incident at West Point.
OH! If Beauregard is still in the east, can we have both "Napoleons" fight each other. I mean, McClellan vs Beauregard could be an interesting fight.
It would indeed be interesting. Beauregard will feature prominently in this TL!
You know some people have class tomorrow right?
Sorry But I had finally finished the update and I couldn't wait to post it.
That concept of neighbors not wanting to give orders made me think of that MASH episode where Hawkeye and BJ got Radar a promotion to Lieutenant and he would only give suggestions.
It also made me think of this girl in youth group who is, shall we say, a natural leader and working on being less bossy. I'm sure there would be some who would naturally rally to leadership, the question is are they respected enough to be followed.
Yes. I think it was Foote who said the soldiers saw no reason why they should obey their neighbors, because even if they put on a hatt and gain a fancy title, they're still their neighbors.
Confederate control of the Chesapeake counties could not be established – most of those counties, with a high slave population, were secessionist, but had no land connection to the rest of the Confederacy and were devoid of rebel troops.
To be fair, there is a land connection to the rest of the confederacy, the Maryland Eastern Shore borders the two counties of Virginia Eastern Shore.
I think those fell pretty quickly OTL, and even if Virginia somehow managed to get soldiers there, they probably left after the Army of the Susquehanna was formed.
I hope the name "Army of the Susquehanna" is retained for TTL and becomes its equivalent of the "Army of the Potomac" since the name "Susquehanna" is just damn cool
As an aside, excellent job with the last chapter @Red_Galiray and this is fast becoming one of my favorite TL's for a different American Civil War! I liked that it had a pre-war POD too. I'm a fan of different Reconstructions, especially ones coming after a harsher civil war which would force reconstruction in a way the OTL war did not. The Confederacy doing better, and the war maybe forcing the Union to fight harder/longer would bring a different understanding out.
I think you capture the early problems with the Volunteer troops well. Much of my own research on this, though primarily for Canadians for my own TL, shows that the very small minded character of many early Volunteer officers tended to be detrimental until they were smoothed over in battle (either by men being killed or people seeing the light, ect). Perhaps the most infamous story I've read concerns the 13th Volunteer Battalion where the appointed Colonel was at odds with his subordinates, and was badgered into retirement by his inferiors, then got one over on them by appointing the local brigade commander as head of the regiment instead of them! It badly damaged the units cohesion and meant that when it first saw battle in 1866 the commanders were at odds with one another in the extreme, leading to terrible debacle.
Having Cameron, rather than Stanton (so far) is going to be an interesting divergence. He may be powerful in Pennsylvania, but he was a lousy high official. Replacing him later on may become a necessity if 1861-62 goes bad enough for the Union.
Thank you very much! OTL, Stanton replaced Cameron in January 1862. The greater political power of Lincoln (he's THE midwestern Republican ITTL) and the more critical situation probably means he will replace Cameron earlier.
It should be noted that the CS governments, state and local, took much more aggressive action against pro-Union locals than the US ever did against copperheads. The example of the mass hanging in Texas of pro-Union German settlers is but one example.
I'll write a mini-update about this in the future.
I disagree on a number of levels. Not only did "states' rights" die OTL--10th amendment was killed at Appomattox for the USA, and the Confederacy was explicitly against states' rights from the moment it made its first alteration to the US constitution. The Confederacy was literally about nothing more than slavery, and "states' rights" was nothing more than a flimsy canard put up by a rebellion whose VERY FIRST MOVE was to ban any of the rebel states from ever banning or restricting slavery in the future--something that went against even the principles of many Southern Democrats! Further, I strongly doubt that with emotions running high the Confederacy won't ban Union trade from the Mississippi, which will result inevitably in a retaliatory embargo from the Union and a reliance upon the Erie Canal and other northern trade routes.
It's really ironic than in their pursuit of states rights, agrarianism and all that stuff, the Confederacy became far more centralized and tyrannical than the Union ever was. As McPherson says, Davis had to "don the mantle of Hamilton" even though they followed the ideals of Jefferson.
War is not won by fancy tactics, but by out building and out making the enemy. Liked to see the logistics info - Breckenridge needs to get better people; foreign aid will probably be a must.
Maryland makes sense, considering the more PA-like rural northern counties will be pro-union while the rest is more VA-like. The CSA needs to eliminate Fort McHenry, so they should find some massive siege guns or make some based on European designs and shell it to oblivion. However, that could be a propaganda bonanza for Lincoln because of the Star Spangled Banner
It's unlikely a prolonged siege could be maintained, and Union naval supremacy basically means Fort McHenry can be supplied for a long, long time.
I am suprised that the south has more troops then the north at this point? there would be some many men coming that some were prob going to be est estbalsihed on there own and just show up. Then the clerks are like sure go ahead
Also I suspect forgien donations or weapons will be coming in a large amount
@Red_Galiray could we have a mini update on volunters some times or squeezed into the main updates because with this war being more like the spanish civil war I except there will be many more volunteer groups coming silently crossing figure for karl marx to decide to come rather than otl when he stay behind
The Southern advantage in manpower was temporary and short-lived. By August, 1861, the Army of the Susquehanna is already bigger than Beauregard's Army of Maryland (or the Chesapeake, I haven't decided a name yet). Volunteers deserve their own mini-update, but I think it's too early for that. To be frank, I can't come up with a topic for the next mini-update, so if anyone has a suggestion, please tell me.
Unsurprisingly, the Confederates faced their first manpower crisis in the spring of 1862 after the initial wave of enthusiasm had crested and volunteering had fallen drastically. To solve this, the Confederates relied on the conscription (and the threat of it) of white Southern male between the ages of eighteen and thirty-five to keep their ranks filled. The Confederacy pursued a more determined mobilization of human resources and was thus able to put a considerably larger percentage of its population into the field as soldiers at the expense of its industry.
Indeed. Also to consider, though the Union had in theory a manpower advantage of 4-to-1 (counting only white men), they weren't able to recruit non-naturalized immigrants, people who were too far away, or disloyal men, so that advantage was reduced to 3.5-to-1, and in practice they often had double or triple the Southern numbers.
I think that's an improvement form OTL, given more parts of the border states? Still pretty weaksauce, especially the former.
Those are the numbers McPherson gives in his analysis of the Northern industrial advantage. They become starker if we go into specifics, particularly regarding military material: the Union produced "97 percent of the country's firearms in i860, 94 percent of its cloth, 93 percent of its pig iron, and more than 90 percent of its boots and shoes."
SOme do, some don't.
Nathan Bedford Forest came in as a amateur, loathsome traitor that he was.
Problem is, for every good amateur you get about 5 who you can trust to not shoot themselves in the foot, and 7 who shouldn't be anywhere near the field of battle.
Despite the hatred for political officers and people who raised regiments and then appointed themselves, some good generals had their origins there. Grant may be the greatest example.