Alternate Civil War ideas!

Hi there! This is Valus36 introducing himself to all those people out there saying that i am really enjoying the site. I also want to contribute to the site by adding my own posts and ideas. I currently have two already started, but the thing is that i wrote them down by hand. One is several pages long, and the other i just started a few months back. Here is the basics for both of them:

#1 i'm exploring what would happen if Jeff Davis died from some type of sickness i early 1863, lets say February. In his place, Judah P Benjamin, the secretary of state somehow becomes president by a fluk. i am exploring how this would effect the war. One of the things to come out of this is that incompetant commanders such as Bragg and Pemberton would be on a short leash. (in other words, if any one of them screws up, the're gone no if ands or buts) Another thing is that in case of emergancy, lets say the federal thrust on richmond before the chancellorsville campaign, the army gains control of everything, meaing that the govenors who hog the state militia, are sol. I'm currently about to finish the Chancellorsville battle where jackson is wounded, but not seriously, A.P. Hill is killed, and Longstreet is trying to hold on at Fredricksburg against Sedgwick:D

#2 In this one, Patrick Cleburne's manifesto on enlisting slaves into the Confederate Army in exchange for their freedom is turned down by Jeff Davis. Instead of throwing it away, Davis keeps it. POD: In early June, after cold Harbor, Lee turns over command temporarly to Longstreet ( In OTL, Longstreet is severly wounded at the Wilderness and doesn't return to the AoNV untill fall. in this atl, longstreet is still wounded, but only out of the fight for a couple of weeks) and goes to Richmond to ask for reinforcemtns from davis. Sometime during this converstation, as davis is cleaning his desk, a peice of paper falls from his desk. Lee picks it up and starts to read it. What is it? Its Cleburne's Manifesto! Lee and Davis then dicuss the paper and although Davis doesn't like the idea, he asks Lee what he thinks. Lee agrees that the slaves should be allowed to fight for the Confederacy in exchange for their freedom because if not, then the south is doomed. Davis sides with Lee and within a couple of weeks, with Lee personally apealing to the congress and threating to resign, the bill passes. This gives the south new life as many slaves join the confederate army, but they would not be ready untill fall (i'd say around late september, early october). October 1864: with their new found strength, the Rebels go on the offensive: In Georgia, where Joe Johnston and William Hardee lure Sherman's army ever deeper into the southern heartland where they plan to destroy it; In Virgina where Robert E Lee builds up his shattered army, he waits to pounce on grant while James Longstreet and Jubal Early attmept to crush sheridan in the valley once and for all; and last but not least in Alabama where John Bell Hood's rejuvenated Army of the Tennessee marchs on Nashville, but there's one catch, Hood takes orders from the army's new commanding general: Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson!:D
 
I've never seen #1 done here, but #2 pops up now and then. Search "Black and Gray".

On #1 you'd first need to explain why Benjamin takes over. There are plenty in line before him, most with a lot stronger political support.
 
IN #1 to tell the truth, when i started writing it, the first person that came to mind was judah p benjamin. In my intro to the story, i state that in my opinion, and to the best of my knowledge, that judah p benjamin was one of the better politicans in Davis's cabinet. If i am mistaken, i apoligize to those out there. Also, when i started this, i was taking a 10 minute break at work. Hows this: when Davis takes ill, judah comes to see him and constantly drops by to checkup on him. Before he dies, Davis for some reason, appoints judah his replacement untill the war is over and elections can be held. Also how about Robert E Lee endorsing Judah as well?

IN reply to #2, i have read the black and grey and i will point out that if you read it carefully, you would have seen several differences. First, the bill doesn't go forward untill after the battle of cold harbor. Second, my atl pretty much stays the same untill after the fall of atlanta and the begining of the seige at petersburg. Third, the south still has Stonewall Jackson and James Longstreet recovers from his wound much earlier than otl. If the third point bothers you, i will answer this question later.
 
IN #1 to tell the truth, when i started writing it, the first person that came to mind was judah p benjamin. In my intro to the story, i state that in my opinion, and to the best of my knowledge, that judah p benjamin was one of the better politicans in Davis's cabinet. If i am mistaken, i apoligize to those out there. Also, when i started this, i was taking a 10 minute break at work. Hows this: when Davis takes ill, judah comes to see him and constantly drops by to checkup on him. Before he dies, Davis for some reason, appoints judah his replacement untill the war is over and elections can be held. Also how about Robert E Lee endorsing Judah as well?

Yes, Benjamin was one of the best in the CS government. But best does not always mean politically viable. In fact, it's often the less-talented who go to the top since they're less of a "threat". And it's a matter of constitutionally-dictated succession. Davis doesn't get to just pick his successor. So you'd need a serious shakeup of the CS government, and that's probably a bridge too far. I advise you research the CS constitution and presidential succession deeply.

IN reply to #2, i have read the black and grey and i will point out that if you read it carefully, you would have seen several differences. First, the bill doesn't go forward untill after the battle of cold harbor. Second, my atl pretty much stays the same untill after the fall of atlanta and the begining of the seige at petersburg. Third, the south still has Stonewall Jackson and James Longstreet recovers from his wound much earlier than otl. If the third point bothers you, i will answer this question later.
Without knowing your specific changes I'd advise you look into the immediate butterflies of your PoD. Jackson surviving for one makes for huge potential changes, so we might not even see Petersburg or Cold Harbor or even Gettysburg as we know them.

I have to give you a fair warning: the posters here are very strict plausibility Nazis and butterfly Nazis, and if you can't justify all your changes with hard History you'll have trouble selling your TLs. You seem to have interesting ideas, but you need to really research and realistically justify them. I advise sticking around and reading a lot of the posts and discussions about what and how the posters think here before you go off and write a TL. It'll save you a lot of frustrations down the road. :)
 
okay, for #1 does anybody have any ideas? I realize that many people will point out the plausability about me putting jpbenjamin in charge of the confederacy above others who have a higher standing. I really am several pages into this alt, and i would really would like to have not to redo it. Also I am relativly new to the art of writing alts. So any pointers will help. thanks. As for #2, my plan was to have jackson be seriously wounded, but not fatally. His wound puts him out of action for sometime, thus he misses gettysburg and the rest of 1863. As for 1864, i was going to have him resume command in mid may(after spotslvania campaign). So he is present at cold harbor. The way i got this idea was from the book, Dixie Victorious, by peter g tsouras. One of the ideas was that General Albert Sidney Johnston surviving his wound from shiloh, but it put him out of the fight untill mid may, 1863. In the case of Longstreet, i was going to say that he was wounded at the wilderness fight, but instead of the throat, he is shot in the shoulder, thus rendering unfit for command untill his wound healed,which was mid may( also after spotslvania). If anyone has problems with this, i am sorry but please be gentle with it. I will improve in time!:D
 
Slave Revolt

I'm not sure the idea of putting guns in the hands of slaves is a good idea. On rare occasions free men shoot their own offices accadentley/ on perpous. A group of armed men with nothing to loose could shoot, in no particular order, Union soldiers, white officers, Confederate soldiers. Some combination of all three. Thus impowered a slave revolt in mid war is a possibility.
 
I don't think you could just take any Black, But OTL that were lots of Blacks that did wear the Gray, and took pride in the fact that they were working to protect their Homes.
 
Even with a lot more black serving, by the time of Cold Harbor, the confederacy was in real trouble when it came to supplies. You're going to have to find a way to feed, clothe, arm and resupply this former slave army, which will not be easy.

;)
 
blacks have always served in the armed forces. But i would like to point out that the north was more racist than the south. I once read a book called For Cause and Comradship: Why men fought the civil war and from what i gathered, many union soldiers resented the fact that they were fighting to free the slaves, in their opinion, they were fighting to preserve the union. As for clothing them and suppling them, the south can do either one or two things, 1, they could get supplies from the valley, because if i am correct, sheridan didn't burn the valley untill after he defeated early's army at cedar creek, also lets not forget that they can raid union supplies, or 2, they could collect the clothing off of dead yankees or yankee prisoners of war.:D
 
IN reply to #2, i have read the black and grey and i will point out that if you read it carefully, you would have seen several differences. First, the bill doesn't go forward untill after the battle of cold harbor. Second, my atl pretty much stays the same untill after the fall of atlanta and the begining of the seige at petersburg.

That's way too late for the black manpower to have made a difference. That's why in THE BLACK AND THE GRAY, I had the bill pass the Confederate Congress in March 1864.
 
That's way too late for the black manpower to have made a difference. That's why in THE BLACK AND THE GRAY, I had the bill pass the Confederate Congress in March 1864.

I understand what postion you are coming from. your timline was march of 1864, while i decided that june of 1864 would be mine. i believe that you had your manpower start in june of 1864. that's a little over two months training. IN my story,they come online untill october of 1864,which is three months of training. anyways, i liked your story as i have read it several times. in conclusion, as to you pointing out that june is way too late, at least it would give them a better chance to fight, unlike otl, in which a bill was passed in march 1865, now, thats want i call too little, too late.
 
Judah Benjamin actually alienated a lot of people while he was the Confederate Secretary of War. He fell out with Joe Johnston who was once quoted as saying that the Confederacy stood no chance of winning as long as Benjamin was in power in Richmond, he fell out with Beauregard who expressed the same opinion as Johnston, he fell out with Stonewall Jackson who attempted to resign when Benjamin interfered with his command only for Joe Johnston to talk him out of it, not to mention other disputes with W.H.C. Whiting, James Longstreet, G.W. Smith, D.H. Hill and just about every other general in Virginia. He was also very unpopular with many politicians as he was seen as Davis's yes man and the anti-Davis league led by Louis T. Wigfall would never stand for him as president.
 
Sometime during this converstation, as davis is cleaning his desk, a peice of paper falls from his desk. Lee picks it up and starts to read it. What is it? Its Cleburne's Manifesto! Lee and Davis then dicuss the paper and although Davis doesn't like the idea, he asks Lee what he thinks. Lee agrees that the slaves should be allowed to fight for the Confederacy in exchange for their freedom because if not, then the south is doomed.
i beleive that the Cleburne Paper was passed round to various Confed Generals, when it first came out. As such Lee would be familiar with the Idea.

While Lee vetoed the Idea, Beliving the Confed man powere problem where not that pressing.
Realizing after the Battle Of The Wilderness that Grant was willing to use the Union Manpower advantage as a giant sledgehammer.
Lee then goes to Davis to discuss the problem.

Whether or not Davis & Congress have the Right to free these Blacks, is a Question for the SCOTCS after the War.
 
It seems to me that many people don't want me to go on with my atl. everywhere i read, i get the feeling that no matter what i say to defend my ideas, all i get are excuses on way it won't work. Lee would be against it, it would be too late to help the confederacy, not enough supplies, etc. Well, how about when Washington's army during the revolution almost collapsed because there wasn't any supplies for the soldiers or the fact that the revolution almost collapsed several times, like 1776(where washington's army almost melted away), 1780(when it looked like the british would conquer the south), or the mutinies in 1781 in washington's camp? How about the fact that Davis himself ordered the letter surpressed so that it wouldn't get out? As for lee rejecting cleburne's letter in early 1864, from the sources that i have read, lee didn't see the letter untill Dec 1864!

Now that i made my point (I hope), is it too hard to ask those out there to have an open mind? Give me a chance to prove my self worthy of this site and with a little patience, you might be surprised what i can do. :D
 
blacks have always served in the armed forces. But i would like to point out that the north was more racist than the south. I once read a book called For Cause and Comradship: Why men fought the civil war and from what i gathered, many union soldiers resented the fact that they were fighting to free the slaves, in their opinion, they were fighting to preserve the union. As for clothing them and suppling them, the south can do either one or two things, 1, they could get supplies from the valley, because if i am correct, sheridan didn't burn the valley untill after he defeated early's army at cedar creek, also lets not forget that they can raid union supplies, or 2, they could collect the clothing off of dead yankees or yankee prisoners of war.:D

Ok, whoa whoa whoa.

Books are awesome. But you can't base your entire opinion of the war off one book and a shitload of wikipedia articles. Good books to read would include "The Killer Angels" by Michael Shaara, "Guns of the South" by Harry Turtledove, or "Don't Know Much About the Civil War" by Kenneth C. Davis for an amazing and detailed overview of the Civil War.

Saying the north and the south were both racist is one thing. However the north had regiments of colored soldiers fight among their ranks. The south on the other hand did not treat colored soldiers like soldiers (or men for that sake) and General Forrest massacred the colored garrison at Fort Pillow.

The north was also rife with abolitionists. While the effect of the Emancipation Proclamation made many men dislike Lincoln, many New Englanders felt rejuvenated about the war as it would end slavery when it was finished. As Union soldiers swept into the area, they may not have been ecstatic, but they were happy to let the Negroes be. Confederate armies, on the other hand, were more than happy to go into an area, capture any free Negroes, and return them to slavery.

I'm not saying one country was more racist than another, but look into the facts and make your own decision about the mentality of a nation based on its actions, not on what some guy writes. Alternate history is often the reshaping of the mentality and image of the nations in question and eventually the world. You cannot change an entire nation without knowing what you're changing. Your timeline has some interesting ideas, but it involves a lot more research on your part. As others have suggested, read the Confederate Constitution. (Afterward, try this commentary as well)
 
Here are a few I've tossed around from time to time:

1) The American Civil War erupts in 1850 over a failure of to compromise over the Mexican Cession. I've been meaning to get around to writing this timeline.
2) Grant's Vicksburg Campaign in 1863 meets an inglorious failure and short term butterflies remove the capture of Port Hudson and Lee's invasion of the North in 1863. This puts the CSA in a much better strategic position in 1863.
3) Lincoln dies of a sudden illness after Fort Sumter falls in 1861, leaving the war in the hands of the less competent Hannibal Hamlin.
 
i beleive that the Cleburne Paper was passed round to various Confed Generals, when it first came out. As such Lee would be familiar with the Idea. While Lee vetoed the Idea, Beliving the Confed man powere problem where not that pressing.

Actually, no. Cleburne presented the proposal to a meeting of the Generals of the Army of Tennessee, at Dalton, Georgia, in January 1864. General Johnston refused to forward the proposal to Richmond, stating his opinion that the document was "more political than military in tenor," and since the army was subordinate to the civilian authorities, it was something for the civilian authorities to propose, not the army. Cleburne obediently put the document away, but one of the other Generals (W.H.T. Walker) got a copy of it and, on his own initiative forwarded it to Richmond with the intention of getting Cleburne cashiered from the army. Jefferson Davis and SecWar Seddon viewed it, then Davis immediately ordered it suppressed. Lee never saw it, and had no role in vetoing it.

And when I say Lee NEVER saw it, that is exactly what I mean. The Cleburne Memorial actually had no role in the passage of the OTL Confederate black recruitment law. It was completely and thoroughly suppressed. It remained completely unknown until the copy sent to Richmond by Walker was discovered in the captured files of the Confederate War Department when the OFFICIAL RECORDS was being compiled in the 1880s...E.A. Pollard's THE LOST CAUSE, written in 1866 and which includes a fairly detailed description of the Confederate debate which led to the passage of the recruitment law, doesn't mention Cleburne at all in connection with the debate. The chain of events which actually led to the passage of the March 1865 law started in October 1864, when Governor Henry Watkins Allen of Louisiana wrote a letter to the RICHMOND EXAMINER in which he proposed the idea of arming the slaves. There is no evidence at all that Allen had ever seen or heard of the Cleburne Memorial prior to writing the letter, or afterward. Instead, he was simply expressing views which had been surfacing in various newspapers in Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana since the summer of 1863.

Whether or not Davis & Congress have the Right to free these Blacks, is a Question for the SCOTCS after the War.

Well, in OTL they got around that issue by issuing a regulation that no slave would be accepted for service in the army unless freed BY HIS MASTER first. They didn't force anyone to free their slaves. They simply encouraged masters to do it through patriotism.
 
Last edited:
It seems to me that many people don't want me to go on with my atl. everywhere i read, i get the feeling that no matter what i say to defend my ideas, all i get are excuses on way it won't work. Lee would be against it, it would be too late to help the confederacy, not enough supplies, etc. Well, how about when Washington's army during the revolution almost collapsed because there wasn't any supplies for the soldiers or the fact that the revolution almost collapsed several times, like 1776(where washington's army almost melted away), 1780(when it looked like the british would conquer the south), or the mutinies in 1781 in washington's camp? How about the fact that Davis himself ordered the letter surpressed so that it wouldn't get out? As for lee rejecting cleburne's letter in early 1864, from the sources that i have read, lee didn't see the letter untill Dec 1864!

Now that i made my point (I hope), is it too hard to ask those out there to have an open mind? Give me a chance to prove my self worthy of this site and with a little patience, you might be surprised what i can do. :D

Okay, take it easy...nobody here that I see is telling you NOT to go through with your ATL; instead we're specifically helping you by pointing out potential historical flaws, improbabilities, impossibilities, and weaknesses that'd ruin your efforts and produce a lesser product. If people here are telling you something "won't work", they have historical and plausibility reasons for it, not just some knee-jerk thumbs-down.

In other words, you're making the all-too-common mistake of seeing constructive criticism as a personal attack.

If you calm down and look you'll see people are helping you here, not attacking you. Everyone here wants to see new timelines, new ideas, and support new writers, we just want to see them do things right and avoid making common research errors and blatant impossibilities.

Now, by all means, go forth with your TL ideas, just stay open to the help and advice you're receiving, and try not to take the constructive criticism personally or negatively.
 
Top