Longstreet Not Wounded

Hi there! I just finished reading Gordon Rhea's book on the Battle of the Wilderness. i read where Longstreet got wounded by his own side and was continuing to read how many southerns after the war stated that had longstreet not been wounded, then would have acheived a major victory againt grant and had driven him back across the rappahannock. while i think that their statement is a bit far fetched, i did start to think how the rest of the war would have been shaped had longstreet not had been wounded, so any thoughts?
 
By the time of the Wilderness the South was toast. It was only a matter of time. It might have delayed things a few weeks but even pushing back Grant doesn't change the fact that Grant is able and willing to take considerably more casualties than Lee.
 
Not just able to take and willing to take causalities, but skillful enough to deal with anything Lee can do to him.

It is extremely unlikely that the Army of the Potomac will end up in a position where it is vulnerable to a major defeat of the sort that even a Grant would suffer from.
 
The Confederacy's strategy was the same one that really didn't work that well under Jackson. The Army of the Potomac's leaders had wanted to fight it out under Hooker but he had retreated, Grant was not going to retreat. The attack might derail the II Corps but the same factor that handicapped Grant's offensive, terrain and how perfect it was to disorient attackers would proceed to handicap Lee's army, after another day Grant moves south same as IOTL.

The only real difference I can see is that Longstreet would provide some tactical and strategic leadership that would give Lee's army a bit more finesse but probably handicap it worse from the death toll those troops would take in trying to hold back Grant's continual flanking attacks.
 
The only real difference I can see is that Longstreet would provide some tactical and strategic leadership that would give Lee's army a bit more finesse but probably handicap it worse from the death toll those troops would take in trying to hold back Grant's continual flanking attacks.

Like at North Anna.

If you presume he won't retreat (Which even Longstreet realized - he said something like "Grant will fight us until he wins") the worst case scenario for Grant pretty much happened anyway given how the ANV was able to get to Spotsylvania. In fact, it's possible that the ANV doesn't feel the urgency and the AOTP reaches it first in TTL, as it was a close race.

If thigns go pretty much as OTL till North Anna, I think Longstreet might be able to deal a harder strike to the AOTP, as Lee was hoping Hill would do, but Grant's still not going to retreat. Let's say he loses more men - he's going to move to the better ground, and then I can envision a repeat of the situation at Gettysburg, where Lee keeps ordering attacks even as Longstreet says it's not going to work.Longstreet might not be as insistent - it'll be a much more dangerous situation for the ANV than it was when the Union was on the beetter terrain. But, as you say, Grant will find the better position and continue making thsoe flanking attacks, and it'll cost them int he long run. Instead of Lee seeming to be spent and Grant miscalculating at Cold Harbor, you might get a reverse of that, perhaps.

Either way, I doubt Grant attacks at Cold Harbor the way he did because he'll realized Lee's army isn't beaten. He might just go arounda nd lay siege right aay.
 
Like at North Anna.

If you presume he won't retreat (Which even Longstreet realized - he said something like "Grant will fight us until he wins") the worst case scenario for Grant pretty much happened anyway given how the ANV was able to get to Spotsylvania. In fact, it's possible that the ANV doesn't feel the urgency and the AOTP reaches it first in TTL, as it was a close race.

If thigns go pretty much as OTL till North Anna, I think Longstreet might be able to deal a harder strike to the AOTP, as Lee was hoping Hill would do, but Grant's still not going to retreat. Let's say he loses more men - he's going to move to the better ground, and then I can envision a repeat of the situation at Gettysburg, where Lee keeps ordering attacks even as Longstreet says it's not going to work.Longstreet might not be as insistent - it'll be a much more dangerous situation for the ANV than it was when the Union was on the beetter terrain. But, as you say, Grant will find the better position and continue making thsoe flanking attacks, and it'll cost them int he long run. Instead of Lee seeming to be spent and Grant miscalculating at Cold Harbor, you might get a reverse of that, perhaps.

Either way, I doubt Grant attacks at Cold Harbor the way he did because he'll realized Lee's army isn't beaten. He might just go arounda nd lay siege right aay.

That's what I was thinking of, yes. Though by the point of the Wilderness the AOTP has long passed the point where any single tactical reverse would halt it. A really vicious irony would be if having Longstreet around leads to Lee deciding to really and truly fight in the open, where Grant gets exactly the kind of fighting he wanted all along.....:eek:
 
i am thinking that if longstreet wasn't wounded, what are the chances that Davis would consider him to replace johnston instead of hood? of course if this is even plausable...
 
i am thinking that if longstreet wasn't wounded, what are the chances that Davis would consider him to replace johnston instead of hood? of course if this is even plausable...

It's not plausible, Lee would never allow it, not in the siege that was the most likely result of the 1864 campaign.
 
Top