@TheRockofChickamauga , seeing as you like American Civil War related history/American History, you might be interested in Hard Graft: A President Infinity Election Game.
I'll have to look into this game. Hopefully it will go better than the last game I joined.@TheRockofChickamauga , seeing as you like American Civil War related history/American History, you might be interested in Hard Graft: A President Infinity Election Game.
Thank you for this kind and generous reply. I’ll admit, the Vicksburg thing was more of a case were the author allows certain things to occur for the sake of the plot. If Vicksburg had fallen and the Confederacy was divided, I believe there still would be a chance that the Union could hold out. If this still leaves some a bit perturbed, then I’ll just fall back on the easy excuse of the fact that the original POD for this TL is in the 1850s, and as a result small changes occur in the Vicksburg Camapign to let them hold out slightly longer. Thank you for your comment, though, it really made my day to hear people are still enjoying this TL nearly a year after it first started.For some reason, I just saw this timeline for the first time. Crazy, even allowing for the fact that I don't peek into the pre-1900 forum that much...
There are a lot of things I like about it. But on my read so far, a few concerns:
1. First, I do think it is entirely plausible for an ANV with Jackson in place to knock Meade's forces off the Fishhook position on Day 1. It's also plausible that Stanton and Halleck would panic in response.
2. People here have commented on the casualties. While I do agree that the initial estimate for Lee was simply too low, I don't think the ones for the Army of the Potomac are off base. Destroying a modern, competently officered Western army in detail in the field (and not a siege) to this extent was certainly difficult in the 1860's, but it was not impossible.
3. I do have serious doubts that news of the defeat could reach Vicksburg, or more to the point, Pemberton's men, in time to stop the surrender. For that matter, it is doubtful to me that the news would even reach Lincoln or the War Dept in coherent form by July 3, which is what you'd need as just the first step here. The nearest telegraph station was back in Westminster, and in the confusion of the retreat and the unclear command, it is hard to think anyone in authority could get a dispatch with even a semi-coherent account before the morning of July 3. So then Lincoln somehow has to and then to get the message, decide to cut the ground from under Grant (which I tend to doubt - if Grant is on the verge of getting a surrender, Lincoln will want every scrap of offsetting good news he can get) , and then react so quickly as to get a telegram off to Grant at the time of the negotiations, which started late that morning and concluded by evening. But how does word get to the defenders? Grant would be keen to keep the news sub rosa. Eventually news *could* get through the lines, as it invariably did, but it's hard to see how it could do so within a week's time...and by that point, the men are all paroled and gone and Grant is in Vicksburg. It's just hard to see a victory at Gettysburg on July 2 having any possible chance of stopping the surrender at Vicksburg. Communications are simply too slow.
4. I have more limited reservations about the prospects of Lee successfully storm the defenses of Washington - I think Gingrich and Forstchen's scenario in Grant Comes East is closer to the probabilities here, even with Heintzleman being an ass. The Union heavy artillry troops were green, but the fortifications were insanely formidable. But maybe I can think longer about this, to let the timeline take me along.
Does anyone have a full Union order of units and strength for the Washington fortifications in July 1863? I had thought the troop total was more like 25-30,000, but I don't have anything handy which clarifies.
5. I just can't imagine Lincoln abandoning Washington.
But you know, even if Grant still takes Vicksburg, there's still some room to explore how a CSA victory at Gettysburg could shift the course of the war in a dangerous direction for the Union.
(I do not expect any rewrite at this late date. Just offering up my initial reaction, for a timeline that is good enough to merit a critique, which this one is.)
For the answer to this, I used mostly a mixture of prominent military figures from the CSA Army, as well as leading political figures in the South during the Civil War and afterwards. If you want some helping crafting the presidents for your CSA TL rewrite, feel free to send me a PM, and I’ll help as much as I can, although I’ve been busier lately.Out of curiosity, how did you figure out the choices about who to run for president in your Confederate presidential elections?
Thank you for this kind and generous reply. I’ll admit, the Vicksburg thing was more of a case were the author allows certain things to occur for the sake of the plot. If Vicksburg had fallen and the Confederacy was divided, I believe there still would be a chance that the Union could hold out. If this still leaves some a bit perturbed, then I’ll just fall back on the easy excuse of the fact that the original POD for this TL is in the 1850s, and as a result small changes occur in the Vicksburg Camapign to let them hold out slightly longer. Thank you for your comment, though, it really made my day to hear people are still enjoying this TL nearly a year after it first started.
Let's hope you can move forward alongside with the other timelines you have in hte work.Man, this TL just a breath of fresh air! I’ll have to see if I can get a new update for it by the weekend.
I agree with many of these points, particularly those about assaulting and laying siege to fortified positions. The preparations required are fairly steep for both, and once underway, it is generally a terrible idea to stop unless necessary, excluding instances where new information reveals the attempt to be pointless or pyrrhic.3. I do have serious doubts that news of the defeat could reach Vicksburg, or more to the point, Pemberton's men, in time to stop the surrender. For that matter, it is doubtful to me that the news would even reach Lincoln or the War Dept in coherent form by July 3, which is what you'd need as just the first step here. The nearest telegraph station was back in Westminster, and in the confusion of the retreat and the unclear command, it is hard to think anyone in authority could get a dispatch with even a semi-coherent account before the morning of July 3. So then Lincoln somehow has to and then to get the message, decide to cut the ground from under Grant (which I tend to doubt - if Grant is on the verge of getting a surrender, Lincoln will want every scrap of offsetting good news he can get) , and then react so quickly as to get a telegram off to Grant at the time of the negotiations, which started late that morning and concluded by evening. But how does word get to the defenders? Grant would be keen to keep the news sub rosa. Eventually news *could* get through the lines, as it invariably did, but it's hard to see how it could do so within a week's time...and by that point, the men are all paroled and gone and Grant is in Vicksburg. It's just hard to see a victory at Gettysburg on July 2 having any possible chance of stopping the surrender at Vicksburg. Communications are simply too slow.
4. I have more limited reservations about the prospects of Lee successfully storm the defenses of Washington - I think Gingrich and Forstchen's scenario in Grant Comes East is closer to the probabilities here, even with Heintzleman being an ass. The Union heavy artillry troops were green, but the fortifications were insanely formidable. But maybe I can think longer about this, to let the timeline take me along.
Does anyone have a full Union order of units and strength for the Washington fortifications in July 1863? I had thought the troop total was more like 25-30,000, but I don't have anything handy which clarifies.
5. I just can't imagine Lincoln abandoning Washington.
I agree with many of these points, particularly those about assaulting and laying siege to fortified positions. The preparations required are fairly steep for both, and once underway, it is generally a terrible idea to stop unless necessary, excluding instances where new information reveals the attempt to be pointless or pyrrhic.
I would put TheRockofChickamauga's estimate of 20,000 as the number of men within Washington's defenses as fairly accurate prior to a loss at Gettysburg, but I personally would place the number at around 25,000. After such a defeat, I would probably put the number higher due to desperate reinforcement from nearby garrisons and desperate impressment of random militias and city-folk into the ranks, though such a force would be fairly ineffective.
And as for the idea of a post-Vicksburg victory for the Confederates, I agree. It would be immensely difficult, especially when also considering the effects of the concurrent Tullahoma campaign on the Western Theatre. I cover in my Chickamauga campaign a timeline in which the Confederates have quite possibly one of the best realistic outcomes for the battle, along with a number of other major victories, and even then, they're still in a very grim position by the time the winter of 1863 rolls around, with a chance of victory that is... not great.
It's funny, in my timeline Bragg and Rosecrans are both out of the picture pretty quick, for totally different reasons. Rosecrans was going to be replaced by Thomas, but he died (R.I.P.), and so Granger took his place. Meanwhile, there was a struggle among Confederate command that eventually left Longstreet of all people in command of the Army of Tennessee... yeah, I know.This is also a good point. Braxton Bragg is just the gift that keeps giving.
Now, one possibility is that with Grant tied down wrapping up Vicksburg, maybe Lincoln decides to yank a corps from Rosecrans to bring east, and orders him to fall back on Nashville. I'm not sure this would happen, but I imagine it would cross Lincoln's mind.
I think you CAN get around this to get your result.
The problem to resolve is that the Gettysburg and Vicksburg Campaigns both culminate basically simultaneously. But what if you could change that? What if you could make Gettysburg, in some form, happen sooner, or push back Vicksburg somewhat later? And by move, I mean, "move by more than just a few days."
I think getting Lee to Gettysburg any sooner is a hard ask, given how fast he reorganized and moved in OTL after Chancellorsville, and the need to get all of Longstreet's troops in hand. There is little slack in the timeline to move it up by more than a few days, I think, and that is not enough. The advantage of looking into this option is that it is easier to get a direct butterfly from Jackson surviving Chancellorsville, since he is, you know, right on the scene. Still, not easy. Maybe I should think about this some more.
But I *could* see Grant getting delayed in kicking off the Grand Gulf/Bruinsburg landings by 2-3 (maybe even 4) weeks, for a number of plausible reasons that could be reasonable butterflies of a resasonable POD; or in the alternate, if it must come after May 4, Grant gets delayed on the way up to Champion Hill. Which, if the rest of the campaign plays out as in OTL, would mean Grant would be far enough away from obtaining a surrender that an order from Lincoln to withdraw becomes plausible; and even that, somehow, news seeps through the lines to Pemberton and his men, which eventually would be inevitable. I could see Lincoln wiring Grant, on July 5-6, querying: "Is it likely you can secure Pemberton's surrender in the next fortnight?" Grant could respond that it is not impossible, but far from certain. At that point, Lincoln might reluctantly order Grant to lift the siege.
Here is one other difficulty, and it is one Grant would point out: Without control of Vicksburg, a withdrawal of Grant's army to make parts of it available to go east is going to be difficult. He could march up to Corinth, but that would take...weeks. To load onto transports out of gun range of Pemberton means probably dragging troops up to Snyder's Bluff or down to Grand Gulf. Either way, it is hard to see Grant being able to get any divisions to Pennsylvania before September.
But as I say, I think even without Vicksburg sticking, you can find a way to a plausible Southern victory. Not easy, but not impossible.
Anyway, I am enjoying the timeline anyway. The Vicksburg thing really is the one thing that's scratchy to me, and even that could be fixed, as I said. Otherwise, a lot of plausible things to chew over here.
I agree Vicksburg is a major complication. It makes Zero Sense to have Grant raise the siege. Withdrawing would actually put his army in jeopardy, for no possible gain. As you say he couldn't ship a Corps to Pennsylvania for about 2 months, so it make no strategic sense. Other Union Corps were available in the East to fill the gap. To retreat from Vicksburg would be giving back the gains of the last 2 years of hard fighting. The Union only had to hold their positions and the Mississippi Valley would fall into their hands.
Who was it before? And who is your favorite CSA president if it is not to prying to ask.Huh. Guess my new favorite (US) president in this timeline is Lodge now.